Foxes and Hedgehogs

Over dinner, a friend mentioned that she thought a particular country produced the most patents, and although I remember reading the same article about 10 years ago, - I believe it was in the NY Times - it is no longer true if it ever was. Looking at patents per capita, I found a variety of articles based on quality sources, and although the country does not rank in the top 10, it does rank well in Bloomberg's Innovation Index. The latter is not solely based on patent numbers since one needs to consider other measures of innovation. Bloomberg's scoring includes indicators such as R&D spending, manufacturing, the number of high-tech companies, secondary education attainment, and the number of research personnel. On a separate note, countries with large engineering and semiconductor industries and those that score well in international comparisons on science and math will dominate patents and innovation, as well as those countries with freer cultures, although this is syn...

In response to a NY Times article discussing the non-sensical hype surrounding Trump and the economy, How Good Is the Trump Economy, Really? , my post received over 600 Recommended clicks, the equivalent of likes: I see several major issues with the Trump economy: The current economy is really an extension of the Obama economy. Obama inherited a miserable situation created by Republicans, the same Republicans that prevented the economy from regrowing by implementing austerity measures, in effect harming many people. Whatever exuberance beyond that is the irresponsibility of tax cuts and deficit spending that Republicans are going to use to eventually harm Medicare, Medicaid, and Socal Security. The good of the economy is mostly for the upper end of the income spectrum. Even though there is low unemployment, most Americans are not really thriving.

Although the most common narrative in the major press focuses on its immediate effects on income, what do I think is likely to happen, outside of the common narrative: A return to faux fiscal hawkishness to justify cuts to social welfare spending Additional cuts to federal worker wages and benefits Additional reductions in oversight justified as an effort to restrain waste and expenditures Tax collection efforts will falter, as the IRS suffers resource constraints and people game the system for maximum benefit Even more disingenuous and corrupt behavior from politicians, since they've finally ruined the ACA... Reductions in longevity, employee safety, environmental health, maternal welfare, and educational outcomes - There are multiple factors at play, and some aspects like longevity might improve if the country can get a handle on opioid addiction - although rather than outright reversion, one might see even slower improvements than in previous years

Since it involves predictions about the Trump presidency, a post on another of my sites , I thought to report here: Trump might have made inflammatory statements about trade, from his cabinet choices it looks like a ploy to increase defense expenditures and oil profits. His hard-right appointees will unsettle regions, if not lead to all-out war, and doing so requires increases in defense, and a disrupted oil flow will increase the cost of oil that will increase Exxon's profit margin and turn US extraction profitable. Even his anti-terrorism slant would lead to profits in companies tied to Peter Thiel, Palantir. Expanding infrastructure and real estate deals, disguised as urban renewal, could also assist Trump, or at least enlarge his influence over the real estate world. You might be right in predicting he will increase tariffs, as well as foul trade in other ways, but most presidents tone down their rhetoric once they are in power. Unless Trump's business empire can benefit ...

I was noticing that the choice of an Exxon executive as Secretary of State meant the US was leaning towards becoming a petro-state, and mused about how war would increase Exxon's profits. Then, Rick Perry was suggested to head the Department of Energy. An idiot from an oil state heading a department usually tasked with concerns about defense, with significant control of nuclear resources. A loose prediction: Action: Voiding the Iran deal, and well as conflicts, or even outright military action, in the mideast. Action: Dismissal of most climate concerns, and the purging of staff in, and the ruination of, departments devoted to science and the environment, except as it serves the existing oil and military agendas Motive: Disrupting oil flows will increase the value of oil, which will lead to excess profits from refiners, and increased profitability of extraction companies in North America

Few people realize how much Blue states subsidize living in Red states, but I imagine it can only get worse, as the Republicans are only likely to transfer even more money for themselves and their constituency. What I'd expect to see: Even more money transferred from Blue states to Red states, through federal programs that disproportionately provide funds to conservative America, via infrastructure, defense, or police Support for male-dominated, aging industries, at the expense of female industries, e.g., education, health care and social agency, or at the expense of green technologies and high tech, except as it relates to defense and security-related concerns Tax offsets to infrastructure projects, transferring public assets to private developers for pennies on the dollar

Before the election, the NY Times had an article on 5 reasons to vote for Trump. What follows is my response , and although tongue-in-cheek, I assume that some of this will play out as described... Five reasons: He'd let loose the Republican hounds of hell, dreams of misogyny, anti-semitism, ignorance, greed, and aggression He'd destroy enforcement for laws governing the environment, health and welfare, business and banking, tax evasion, etc., that would harm minorities and the working class... He'd be a great source of daily inane tirades reported as news, because he said it, and who knows, he might do it... Because he'll extend the genre of comedy-horror. Comedy will both proliferate - psychopath in chief - as well as get scary, because he actually might do what he says. Because you like the Trump logo, would love to have it plastered everywhere, and having a self-dealing, corrupt leader would empower your own greed and corruption...