Hawks

 “Hawk” is a general term used to describe the entire group of diurnal (active by day) predatory birds. Worldwide there are approximately 270 species of carnivorous birds that comprise the order Falconiformes – the scientific name for hawks. All are classified as birds of prey, or raptors.

I thought it might be interesting to look up the word, "hawk". 

Why? you say.

Because too often I hear our politicians or our political views described as hawks or doves.

According to the above description of a hawk, it does not confer a very positive or happy view of what amounts to about half of the voting population. The definition above suggests that a hawk is a bird that is not very friendly to other birds and animals. Unlike other birds that are content to eat berries and such things, hawks are carnivorous.  

In the political arena a hawk, as a opposed to a dove, is used to describe someone who votes conservative and would probably be a Republican. It might be used at times to note a preference for a stronger military or it might describe someone who prefers less government. 

I am not sure that this terminology is useful or descriptive of either political ideology. A hawk is definitely not meant to be a compliment. But being named a dove is not much better. It often means that you prefer peace. That's nice. It also means you can find your way home. Often it means a person who votes liberal and is probably a Democrat. That might be good or bad. 

I suppose that all Ds are not doves and all Rs are not hawks. But sometimes it seems that way.

Whether you are a hawk or a dove, I hope you have a happy New Year. 

https://theraptortrust.org › bird-resources › bird-facts

Ice on Friday

Yesterday I was feeling almost poetic about the beautiful snowfall here. 

Well, no more. The lovely snow has turned to ice. It is freezing here in Seattle and I have spent the morning looking out my window watching people trying to navigate sidewalks across the street.  It is a sheet of ice out there and people are doing more sliding than walking. 

My gym, a two-block walk, is closed for the next few days so I don't have the temptation to skate over there. Once things begin to thaw I might try to take a walk. 

One guy has been out there on the sidewalk with a snow shovel and he is making some progress but it is very slow going. The street looks like an ice rink. I guess I will be inside for a while. My furnace is working fine but my anxiety makes me wonder if I have serviced it lately. I have to worry about something. 

Jason had the intelligence to get out of town before all this hit. But I am not sure that things are much better in Indiana. I hope it is. Oops. I just checked the weather and it is probably worse in Indiana. 

A guy just walked by my window. He had on a winter hat and gloves, and a short-sleeve t shirt. Weird. I am inside with a sweatshirt on. 

Now the guy's wife is out there breaking up the ice. She seems to be the better of the two. They are definitely getting their exercise for the week. 

By Saturday, the highs are supposed to be in the low 50s. That would be nice. 

Cheers

Larry

Snowy Morning in Seattle

 I'm feeling poetic. That's an urge I should and will resist.

The snow is falling. Big flakes now. Leafless trees across the street with bare branches covered in snow. 

No snow plows yet so the street look white and icy. 

Nowhere to go -- maybe a two block walk to the gym later. Maybe.

My cupboards and fridge are well stocked. No need to go shopping.

Pondering breakfast. An omelet sounds good but hot oatmeal sounds even better.

I might have a second cup of coffee. 

Chilly so I just turned up the thermostat. What the hell, I can pay for little more heat. 

Flakes getting even bigger. 

That's my morning in Seattle. How's yours?

Short Blurb on the US Economy

Here's a short blurb about the expected future course of the US economy. 

Looks like a bit of a slowdown but nothing crazy. 

I went to the CBO site  -- Congressional Budget Office -- for the latest macro data and forecasts for the U.S. from 2021 to 2026.

Output, as measured by real GDP,  grew relatively fast in 2021 and 2022 but it is forecast to grow much slower -- by 2.8% -- in 2023 and then gradually slowing to 1.4% in 2026. 

The unemployment rate is predicted to fall from 5.4% in 2021 to 3.5% in 2023. It will then rise to 4% in 2026.

Inflation, as measured by the CPI, hits 6.1% in 2022 but then slows to 2.3% by 2026.

The 10-year Treasury rate increases gradually from 1.4% in 2021 to 3.5% in 2026. 

Summary -- looks like a typical demand-induced slowdown with output growing more slowly, unemployment rising, and inflation falling. Interest rates are expected to rise, presumably because monetary policy will be tightening. The changes look pretty marginal and may not be that noticeable to most of us. 

Changing Things Up

Since March 5, 2010 I have posted in this blog more than 700 times. Its been a great ride for me. It gave me an opportunity to think more about many issues most of them macroeconomic. I studied macroeconomics in my graduate program and spent most of my career at Indiana University teaching macro and publishing in macroeconomic journals. I was never a household name in macro but I did enough to be promoted to full professor and receive tenure at Indiana University.  The blog posts did not count toward tenure but I think that activity gave me a familiarity with the real world that helped both my teaching and my academic research. 

In retirement I wanted to keep up with the usual topics.  Now I want to change things up a bit.  Today I am on to more fascinating topics. How many fairies fit on the head of pin is quite challenging? Or -- How much wood can a woodchuck chuck? I am hoping with more time to someday solve those challenging riddles. As you can see I will have a lot to keep me busy.

Just kidding about the fairies and woodchucks. 

While it has been fun to research and write about current macro events and issues, an underlying joy of this project has been communicating with you. You are my relatives, friends, and former colleagues and students. What a joy it has been to to keep in touch with you. 

So what am I going to change? I am going to write about the usual suspects -- but maybe with more brevity. I have helped you nap enough. Now it's going to be wham bam thank-you mam.

I request and hope to stay in touch with you. Perhaps you want to discuss the latest inflation rate. Maybe you want to tell me your 10 year old just graduated from MIT. Or maybe you are bored and want to tell me about the medicines you are taking. I am not planning to exit planet Earth for a while so I hope to stay connected with you. 

Also I might not stick with the Tuesday schedule. Be more spontaneous. When some news hits I hope to strike while the iron is hot. 

I hope you like the changes. 

Larry

Maxi-Min in 2024

When I was in school at Georgia Tech I learned about optimization theory in math courses. We learned that we could phrase a decision in terms of maximums and minimums. What choice of goods and services might lead to the most satisfaction for a family? What choice of productive inputs might lead to the lowest cost of production? Fun stuff. That's when we had to learn calculus -- a type of math that let's you find maximums and minimums. 

One can apply these basic ideas of choice theory to almost anything. Right now I am thinking about our choices of political candidates. Will Joe Biden be our optimal choice? Or will Donald Trump lead us to the best outcomes? 

I just read an article that came up with a surprising answer to this political optimization question. This article explained why the best choice was neither Biden nor Trump. It didn't argue for anyone else but it was pretty clear -- we are worse off with either of these guys. I think I agree. 

It is an interesting world or time that we live in where most of us believe that neither candidate ought to be President of the USA. Not that this opinion is totally unusual. I recall in the past people saying something like -- if anyone wanted to be President, then that ought to automatically disqualify him or her. 

You would think that democracy might solve this kind of problem of poor choices. You would think that if a candidate did not appeal to a majority of voters, then he or she could not win an election. The electorate breaks down into those on either extreme of political issues and those in the middle. Thus, candidates who represent extreme ideas might have a hard time winning enough votes. One has to appeal to at least part of that large group of voters we classify as moderate. 

I am not sure if Biden or Trump are extremists but they do seem to appeal to many extreme voters. Biden represents liberal progressives well. Conservatives would be more attracted to Trump even though he is not a typical conservative. But the picture is not just about ideologies. Both of these men are special. Biden is old and uncharismatic. He does not get away with things a younger John F. Kennedy might have. Trump is almost as old but he fits no ideological camp -- he is not a typical republican or conservative. His personality turns off a lot of the usual Republicans. 

The above is why many of us simply don't want to vote in the next presidential election. Maybe they will give an election and no one will come? Of course, many of us will look at the above and decide which candidate is the most dangerous and then vote for the other guy. But maybe instead, we will look at both guys and just not vote. In that case, the candidate who was the least of the worse might win. That's not anything to be happy about.