Deregulate!

The US economy’s recovery from the 2008 recession was historically weak, as shown in this chart from the Washington Times.

GDP growth
GDP growth

In an article that followed an address earlier this month where the President boasted about employment numbers, the New York Post summarized the situation this way:

From his Jan. 20, 2009, inauguration until last month that figure has fallen from 7.8 percent to 4.9 — down 37.2 percent. But:

  • The labor force participation rate over that period has slid from 65.7 percent to 62.9 (the lowest reading since March 1978) — down 4.3 percent.
  • On Obama’s watch, the percentage of Americans below the poverty line has grown, according to the most recent Census data, from 14.3 percent to 14.8 percent in 2014 — up 3.5 percent.
  • Real median household income across that interval sank from $54,925 to $53,657 — down 2.3 percent.
  • Food Stamp participants soared in that time frame from 32,889,000 to 45,874,000 — up 39.5 percent.
  • Meanwhile, from Obama’s arrival through the fourth quarter of 2015, the percentage of Americans who own homes sagged from 67.3 percent to 63.8 — down 5.2 percent.

The Orange County Register wrote “the economic recovery that began in 2009 is the weakest during the post-World War II era…Real per-capita growth in disposable income since the so-called Great Recession ended in 2009 is not even a third of what it was during the previous four economic expansions. And job creation during the Obama recovery is worse than during all but one postwar recovery.”

The rate of new business creation has plummeted. An article by Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO of Gallup reported as follows: “The U.S. Census Bureau reports that the total number of new business startups and business closures per year — the birth and death rates of American companies — have crossed for the first time since the measurement began.” His article included the following chart that shows the drop in formation of new businesses.

Drop in new businesses
Drop in new businesses

The government pays people to NOT work, and the ways it does that and the dollars spent doing it grow and grow. The US now has the highest business tax rates in the world; and government regulation has grown out of hand. Voters are worried. Exit polling in the New Hampshire primary showed that 79% of Democrats were either ‘somewhat’ or ‘very’ worried about the economy; for Republicans it was 93%.

Stimulus
The two main tools of economic management are monetary and fiscal policy. President Obama has used both tools to try and stimulate the economy. On the fiscal side there was a $787 billion stimulus spending package (remember ‘shovel ready’?) passed early in 2009. On the monetary side the Obama administration used bond-buying programs (remember QE1, QE2 and QE3?) to push $3.7 trillion of cash into the market, and has held interest rates down – the current Federal funds rate is one half per cent.

The administration also had the benefit of lower energy prices. A story in the New York Times had experts predicting a boost of a half percent of economic growth and $70 billion in annual consumer spending. All with very little result. The administration has painted itself into a corner. There is nowhere left to go with stimulus. The tank is dry.

Cut Taxes and Deregulate
The economy needs tax and regulatory reform. Calls for tax reform come from both of the major parties. The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. There is also a problem with regulation strangling businesses.

The World Bank ranks business climate across countries using different indices. One of these is “ease of starting a business”, a factor largely driven by regulation. The index includes 189 countries — they apparently left out four of the 193 member states in the UN. The US ranks 49th on ‘ease of starting a business’ behind Burundi, Afghanistan, and the Ukraine.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute does an annual survey of Federal regulations and found the following: “Federal regulation and intervention cost American consumers and businesses an estimated $1.88 trillion in 2014 in lost economic productivity and higher prices…In 2014, agencies issued 16 new regulations for every law—that’s 3,554 new regulations compared to 224 new laws.”

Regulation is a battle of a thousand cuts. Three examples from the Wall Street Journal’s editorial pages:

  • On 2/2/16, a former Labor Dept chief economist estimated the cost of one deceptively innocuous new requirement at “between $7.5 billion and $10.5 billion in the first year, and between $4.3 billion and $6.5 billion in future years”.
  • In an 11/14/15 editorial a Florida economic development official estimated the cost of a new overtime requirement, for his state alone, at $1.7 billion in 2016.
  • A 3/3/16 editorial called out the impact on broadband investment of the FCC’s new Internet regulations: capital expenditures by Internet service providers rose 8.7% in 2013. They rose by less than half that in 2014 as the new rules were considered. Then the rules were applied, and in 2015 capital expenditures dropped again – to a negative .4%.

Bottom Line

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

The Declaration of Independence, 1776

The Obama administration has tried fiscal and monetary stimulus over and over. You can’t accuse the President of being a pragmatist: he has an idea, he sticks to it regardless of success or failure.
Stimulus has failed. The economic data shows it, and exit polls show that voters feel it in their gut.
Deregulation and tax reform are both overdue. Somehow, Congress needs to take hold of the Federal rule-making mechanism. They can start by repealing the Davis-Bacon Act.

Al Sharpton, Spokesperson and Charlatan

Al Sharpton now seems to be the consensus national spokesman for the African-American community. Sharpton was interviewed on the MSNBC show Meet the Press this weekend (2/14/16), and asked for his opinion on Bernie Sanders, and who he would endorse in the Presidential campaign. On the front page of the Wall Street Journal on Thursday (2/11/16) you see a color photo of Bernie Sanders and Al Sharpton with the headline ‘Sanders meets with Sharpton in Harlem‘. CBS News says Sharpton is Barack Obama’s “go-to black leader“.

In any recent racial flareup from Ferguson to Flint, Sharpton plays a role as the media’s favorite voice for black opinion. We’ve seen a lot of him over the past decades, but who is Al Sharpton?

Tawana Brawley
Before the flap over the Duke Lacrosse team, or Rolling Stone Magazine and the UVA fraternity, there was the Tawana Brawley story; and while the Tawana Brawley story wasn’t originated by Al Sharpton, he took it over, fomented and orchestrated it. Tawana Brawley launched Al Sharpton into the national spotlight on the backs of two police officers and a district attorney, falsely accused.

In November, 1987 Tawana Brawley accused six white men of kidnapping and raping her, and specifically pointed the finger at Steven Pagones, an Assistant District Attorney in Dutchess County. Al Sharpton became Tawana Brawley’s principal advisor and as recorded in Wikipedia, ‘claimed officials all the way up to the state government were trying to cover up defendants in the case because they were white’.

In October, 1988 a grand jury ruled the case was a fabrication. Steven Pagones sued Sharpton and his accomplices for character defamation, and in 1998 Pagones was awarded $345,000. A story published by National Public Radio summarized: ‘Over the years, critics, politicians and news media have demanded that Sharpton apologize for his role and publicly condemn Brawley. But Sharpton has refused, perpetuating the ill will that many still hold for him.’ No kidding.

Financial Maneuvering
The National Action Network, founded by Sharpton, was cited in a New York Times story as “sustained for years by not paying federal payroll taxes on its employees” while Sharpton “traveled first class and collected a sizable salary, the kind of practice by nonprofit groups that the United States Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration recently characterized as ‘abusive,’ or ‘potentially criminal’ “.

The National Action Network recently gave Sharpton a whopping great raise, to $412,000. Numbers documented in a story in National Review indicate that the group pays its 34 employees a total of $1.9 million, which indicates that Sharpton’s salary constitutes over 21% of the organization’s total payroll.

He has also apparently played fast and loose with a company he owns and with campaign funds. The New York Post reported: “Sharpton’s company, Rev-Al Communications, owes $447,826 to the state… The firebrand activist still has an outstanding balance of $208,000 with the Federal Election Commission for improperly taking campaign money and government matching funds during his 2004 presidential bid, his April 2014 FEC filing shows.”

Al Sharpton is an ordained Baptist and Pentecostal minister. I wonder if those churches were ever asked whether financial skulduggery like this is acceptable practice for their ministers?

Race-baiting
Al Sharpton has derided Jews as ‘diamond merchants‘, referred to white people as ‘crackers‘, and Greeks as ‘homos‘.

Tax Avoidance
Rev. Sharpton also doesn’t like to pay taxes. According to a New York Times story: “Mr. Sharpton still faces personal federal tax liens of more than $3 million, and state tax liens of $777,657”.

The Bottom Line
Any member of the Baptist and Pentecostal faiths should object to his continuing status as a minister.

Al Sharpton is an exploiter and a user, making his living as a minority charlatan and spokesperson for the African-American community. I’m not aware of a single voice from that community, at any time, that has spoken out to call his bluff. If the African American community wants to be taken seriously, to be regarded as virtuous and worthwhile, then it can’t permit fraudulent and immoral scalawags like Al Sharpton to speak for them.

The secret to winning in the NFL

Cleveland Browns and NY Jets fans can relax. Your teams will never be any good. The Jets and Browns can get a top pick in the lottery, change quarterbacks, and change coaches…and they probably will; it won’t make a bit of difference – they’re cursed. Why? Because the Jets and Browns have bad owners.
An inept owner condemns an NFL team to futility and obscurity forever; or at least until the team is sold to a different owner. Four examples from NFL history make the point:

  • Jack Kent Cooke owned the Washington Redskins between 1974 and his death in 1997, and the team went to the Super Bowl three times while he was owner. Then Dan Snyder took over, and the Redskins have been bad ever since.
  • Edward deBartolo bought the San Francisco 49ers in 1977, and during his tenure the 49ers won five Super Bowls and had the most wins in a decade of any NFL team ever. deBartolo lost control of the 49ers in 2000, the York family took over, and the 49ers have been mostly bad ever since.
  • Contrast this with the Pittsburgh Steelers. The Rooney family established the franchise, still owns the team, and the Steelers are almost always good: more Super Bowl wins and more conference championships than anyone.
  • The Seattle Seahawks have had three owners: the Nordstrom family (1976-1988) founded the franchise, they were followed by Ken Behring (1988-1996), and the current owner is Paul Allen. The Seahawks were good under the Nordstroms, bad under Behring, and are currently great under Paul Allen.

A good or bad owner makes all the difference, but why? They don’t ever get out on the field, they don’t ever call a play, and they usually don’t get too involved in player selection. On the other hand the owner is the most enduring presence in team management, and the most powerful. Owners are responsible for picking coaches and general managers, providing a stadium, and financing the team’s operations. If the owner makes bad choices; or is unable to provide enough money to operate the team, the team is crippled. And you can’t fire an owner. Owners don’t come and go like coaches, they’re forever.

Owners ranked
So – who’s good and who’s bad? In 2013, Sports Illustrated said that the five best owners were these:

  1. Rooney Family, Pittsburgh Steelers
  2. Robert Kraft, New England Patriots
  3. Mara & Tisch Families, New York Giants
  4. Jeffrey Lurie, Philadelphia Eagles
  5. Steve Bisciotti, Baltimore Ravens

and the five worst were these:

  1. Al Davis, Oakland Raiders
  2. William Clay Ford, Detroit Lions
  3. Dan Snyder, Washington Redskins
  4. Mike Brown, Cincinnati Bengals
  5. Denise DeBartolo York, San Francisco 49ers

Not surprised? Notice how this list of good and bad from 2013 is still truth in today’s NFL.

The Houston Chronicle and Yahoo Sports both published full ranked lists of NFL owners, 1 through 32. When you put those two lists side-by-side and split the differences, you get this list:


Teams ranked

Yes, it’s possible the writers here are just replaying the teams’ record on the field. Lots of wins = a good owner. But wins and losses are too superficial. I built my own list of NFL owner rankings, and wanted to base my list on more than just wins/losses. Owners are responsible for hiring head coaches and providing a stadium, and the outcomes of both jobs are easily used as metrics for ranking owners.

Good stadiums
Both Sporting News (8/11/15) and USA Today (10/6/15) recently published NFL stadium rankings. Averaging out those two lists gives us this list:


Stadiums ranked

Coaching tenure
This table ranks NFL teams according to coaching tenure:


coaches ranked

The long tenure of New England Patriots’ coach Bill Belichick, he was hired in 2000, puts the Patriots at the top of the list. At the bottom are seven teams that dumped their coaches and had to hire new ones for the 2016 season. I take long tenure as a good thing.

Putting it all together
To come up with my own ranking of NFL owners I combined three factors:

  • wins and losses – a summary of regular season rankings over the last ten seasons (2006-2015), weighted as 50% of the score;
  • stadium quality, weighted as 30% of the score;
  • coaching stability – length of the head coach’s tenure, weighted as 20% of the score.

Here’s my ranking of NFL owners, good to bad:


owners ranked

I actually like the ‘experts’ list better – meaning the list at the top of this article. The biggest single difference between the two lists is Tampa Bay: my list has their owner at 31, the experts rank him at 17. Yes, the future at Tampa Bay looks bright with a good-looking young coach and Jameis Winston at quarterback, so a 17 ranking looks a better bet than 31. I’d bet on Tampa Bay before I’d bet on San Francisco.

The bottom line
The critical un-acknowledged factor in NFL success is the quality of the team’s owner. If you’re a fan of a team with a knucklehead owner, you’ve got a long wait before things get better. If your owner is one of the smart ones, you’re in the tall clover for a long time.
Seattle Seahawk fans – I’d be a lot more concerned about Paul Allen’s health than Marshawn Lynch’s.