Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Iraq Statistics
Ironically, despite the pertinence of these charts as well as their comprehensiveness, I really don't find much to say about them. I just saw this in The Economist and figured it would prove useful to anybody doing research on the Iraq war.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Chuck Norris Economics
From El.
Freaking hilarious.
And "Freaking Hilarious" is the highest rank of hilarity the Captain awards.
Freaking hilarious.
And "Freaking Hilarious" is the highest rank of hilarity the Captain awards.
Underfunded Pensions
What brought down GM and the US auto industry was not so much superior foreign competition, but the dead weight of legacy pensions due to the legions of former union workers that GM had promised pensions to until death do them part. Unfortunately, GM's actuaries did a poor job in projecting life expectancy and thus (depending on whose figures you want to use) it costs GM $1,200 per car more than the competitors simply because they have to pay nearly 1 MILLION FORMER employees a pension, not to mention health care. This is why pensions and health care coverage were more or less cut in this most recent negotiation GM had with the United Lazy ...err... I mean Auto "Workers."
Regardless, GM exemplifies what can happen to an entity that was presumably unassailable. GM was king in the golden age of America, but since those days have come and gone, so has GM's prominence.
Another entity that is presumed to be unassailable or infallible is government. Every basic college finance class assumes there is zero risk in investing in government securities because the government is all powerful and can just tax it's way out of debt (completely ignoring the Laffer effect). But this is not true. A perfect example of a government going belly up is Argentina where it owed the western world over $130 billion and one day decided not to pay.
People, or at least the markets, do not assume such irresponsibility on the part of the US government and still assume it will always pay back its debts, but like GM, governments' solvency (state, federal and local) may be threatened by pensions.
Usually it was assumed that social security or medicare/aid would be the programs to bankrupt the US government. And for the most part, this is true. Osama Bin Laden might as well have just stayed at home because for all the hubbub and tragic loss over 9-11, he could never hope to wreak the havoc that FDR's demon child will upon the US. I mean if you think about, if you REALLY want to destroy a country, don't fly planes into a couple buildings, institute socialism. Just ask Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Jong Il, and Pol Pot.
Regardless, it is not just medicare and social security that will take its toll on the US economy in the near future. It's also the pension problem.
Public pensions, the money promised to government workers when they retire, are underfunded. meaning they don't have the money to make good on the promises they made to everybody, ie- they can't afford the pensions. This means one of two things. Either the government cuts the pension benefits to their employees (heh, good luck) or they tax the American people more (ding ding ding, correct answer).
But this creates a problem and a scenario I see to be more and more likely. Given the housing crash occurring and the increased likelihood of recession, I don't care how many times they cut the interest rate, I think this country is heading for recession (again, I hope I'm wrong). And if we go into recession, then corporate earnings will drop and so too will stock prices.
Compounding the downward pressure on stocks will be the likely election of a democrat to the White House or a capitulating moderate republican, both of which will kowtow to the pressures to raise taxes and redistribute wealth. This will put further downward pressure on stock prices.
But more pressuring than that will be the retirement of the Baby Boomers which begins more or less now. The elder echelon of the Boomers are taking early retirement as we speak and as you enter retirement you switch your holdings from equity to fixed income. This outflow of cash from the equity markets into fixed income will put downward pressure on stock prices (but also push interest rates lower). Also, to make good on their social security and medicare promises, the government will have to increase taxes.
Thus the potential scenario I see is one where housing prices continue to drop, but the stock market continues to drop as well, and the ensuing decrease in consumer spending and confidence, compounded by likely tax increases in the future will throw and keep the economy in recession for a while.
And, in a viscous downward spiral sense, since pensions are primarily funded by investments in the stock market or securitized assets therein, this chart is bound to go down further as stock prices plummet.
Not to get negative on you.
Regardless, GM exemplifies what can happen to an entity that was presumably unassailable. GM was king in the golden age of America, but since those days have come and gone, so has GM's prominence.
Another entity that is presumed to be unassailable or infallible is government. Every basic college finance class assumes there is zero risk in investing in government securities because the government is all powerful and can just tax it's way out of debt (completely ignoring the Laffer effect). But this is not true. A perfect example of a government going belly up is Argentina where it owed the western world over $130 billion and one day decided not to pay.
People, or at least the markets, do not assume such irresponsibility on the part of the US government and still assume it will always pay back its debts, but like GM, governments' solvency (state, federal and local) may be threatened by pensions.
Usually it was assumed that social security or medicare/aid would be the programs to bankrupt the US government. And for the most part, this is true. Osama Bin Laden might as well have just stayed at home because for all the hubbub and tragic loss over 9-11, he could never hope to wreak the havoc that FDR's demon child will upon the US. I mean if you think about, if you REALLY want to destroy a country, don't fly planes into a couple buildings, institute socialism. Just ask Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Jong Il, and Pol Pot.
Regardless, it is not just medicare and social security that will take its toll on the US economy in the near future. It's also the pension problem.
Public pensions, the money promised to government workers when they retire, are underfunded. meaning they don't have the money to make good on the promises they made to everybody, ie- they can't afford the pensions. This means one of two things. Either the government cuts the pension benefits to their employees (heh, good luck) or they tax the American people more (ding ding ding, correct answer).
But this creates a problem and a scenario I see to be more and more likely. Given the housing crash occurring and the increased likelihood of recession, I don't care how many times they cut the interest rate, I think this country is heading for recession (again, I hope I'm wrong). And if we go into recession, then corporate earnings will drop and so too will stock prices.
Compounding the downward pressure on stocks will be the likely election of a democrat to the White House or a capitulating moderate republican, both of which will kowtow to the pressures to raise taxes and redistribute wealth. This will put further downward pressure on stock prices.
But more pressuring than that will be the retirement of the Baby Boomers which begins more or less now. The elder echelon of the Boomers are taking early retirement as we speak and as you enter retirement you switch your holdings from equity to fixed income. This outflow of cash from the equity markets into fixed income will put downward pressure on stock prices (but also push interest rates lower). Also, to make good on their social security and medicare promises, the government will have to increase taxes.
Thus the potential scenario I see is one where housing prices continue to drop, but the stock market continues to drop as well, and the ensuing decrease in consumer spending and confidence, compounded by likely tax increases in the future will throw and keep the economy in recession for a while.
And, in a viscous downward spiral sense, since pensions are primarily funded by investments in the stock market or securitized assets therein, this chart is bound to go down further as stock prices plummet.
Not to get negative on you.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Neato Political Risk Chart
I've always likened taxes to the level of abuse a husband may dish out to his wife. For if you want your wife to stick with you, you would shower her with gifts, adoration, praise and take her out for nights on the town of dancing, dining, flowers and muchas schmoochas. If you want her to leave, ignore her, treat her poorly and cheat on her.
With business, capital, investment and labor it is the same way.
If you want to attract these things to your country and keep them, then you should treat them nice. Treating them nice meaning you keep taxes low, you make regulation non-existent or unburdensome and have a good and fair legal system. And while I primarily focused on taxes, there are other things you have to focus on just as you would your wife.
The Eurasia Group has this "Honey Do" list that companies must follow if they wish to emulate the likes of Ireland, Bermuda, Jersey Island and the whole host of other countries that beat out the economic growth rates of the US. The higher the score, the more points you score with business and capital markets, and thus the happier economic marital bliss you have;
With business, capital, investment and labor it is the same way.
If you want to attract these things to your country and keep them, then you should treat them nice. Treating them nice meaning you keep taxes low, you make regulation non-existent or unburdensome and have a good and fair legal system. And while I primarily focused on taxes, there are other things you have to focus on just as you would your wife.
The Eurasia Group has this "Honey Do" list that companies must follow if they wish to emulate the likes of Ireland, Bermuda, Jersey Island and the whole host of other countries that beat out the economic growth rates of the US. The higher the score, the more points you score with business and capital markets, and thus the happier economic marital bliss you have;
Friday, September 28, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Household Debt as a Percent of GDP
I compiled this chart about 2-3 years ago and thought it worth of an update. Household debt includes not just credit cards, but mortgages as well.
Of the many things that will bring down this country, Americans' desire to spend more than they make will be one of the key ones. Household debt is now at 97% GDP. We could all work one year and (assuming the government doesn't tax us, nor that we'd eat or spend any of our money on anything) then we could pay back our debts.
What's sad however is that this is even worse THAN THE GOVERNMENT! Federal debt as a percent of GDP last I checked was at about 48%. The government is a less voracious spender of money than the American public! American consumers and households are on par with the Italian government and it's knack for deficit spending and racking up debts.
Not to mention, as I've mentioned before, with all the Baby Boomers retiring shouldn't this figure be declining? You know, that as you approach retirement you'd pay off all your debts so you don't saddle future generations with yours? Though I don't doubt for a second it is my generation that is the primary culprit in skyrocketing this figure up since 2001.
And people ask me why the dollar is dropping.
Sheesh.
Of the many things that will bring down this country, Americans' desire to spend more than they make will be one of the key ones. Household debt is now at 97% GDP. We could all work one year and (assuming the government doesn't tax us, nor that we'd eat or spend any of our money on anything) then we could pay back our debts.
What's sad however is that this is even worse THAN THE GOVERNMENT! Federal debt as a percent of GDP last I checked was at about 48%. The government is a less voracious spender of money than the American public! American consumers and households are on par with the Italian government and it's knack for deficit spending and racking up debts.
Not to mention, as I've mentioned before, with all the Baby Boomers retiring shouldn't this figure be declining? You know, that as you approach retirement you'd pay off all your debts so you don't saddle future generations with yours? Though I don't doubt for a second it is my generation that is the primary culprit in skyrocketing this figure up since 2001.
And people ask me why the dollar is dropping.
Sheesh.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
The Chart that Needs No Explanation
Korea spends half of what we do and dominates.
I envy Asian culture.
Gini Coefficients Under Hugo Chavez
Bush is usually blamed for cronyism, allowing the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer and most leftists, deep down inside hate Bush and love, albeit reluctantly maybe, Hugo Chavez.
But Hugo acts as an x-ray machine, showing us just what hypocrites these Hugo supporters are.
At the center of the argument is that Hugo is good and holy, helping the unfortunates, while Bush is evil and conspires with his cronies to make money and trip old people and murder poor people.
The reality could not be any different.
Not that I believe Gini coefficients matter, but an article in The Economist shows that under Hugo Chavez the Gini coefficient has increased, increasing the disparity between rich and poor.
Additionally if you read the whole article (or just the next paragraph) you'll see Hugo is infinitely more corrupt and cronyistic than Bush ever was, dealing out contracts and deals to his buddies and those loyal to him on levels that make Bush seem like a Swede when it comes to corruption.
But the hard core leftists won't believe it, simply because they don't want to. They have a rationale to hate Bush and love Hugo, to fight capitalism and advance socialism, even if it doesn't carry out their self-proclaimed aims of helping out the poor and fighting off corruption. But that's the rub of it all. It isn't about the poor, the poor are just pawns in this game. It is again, as it always has been, about making the left feel good about themselves. Reality be damned, freedom be damned, economic growth and prosperity and the abolition of poverty be damned, I want to think of myself as a good person.
Though deep down inside, you wonder if they really believe it themselves.
But Hugo acts as an x-ray machine, showing us just what hypocrites these Hugo supporters are.
At the center of the argument is that Hugo is good and holy, helping the unfortunates, while Bush is evil and conspires with his cronies to make money and trip old people and murder poor people.
The reality could not be any different.
Not that I believe Gini coefficients matter, but an article in The Economist shows that under Hugo Chavez the Gini coefficient has increased, increasing the disparity between rich and poor.
Additionally if you read the whole article (or just the next paragraph) you'll see Hugo is infinitely more corrupt and cronyistic than Bush ever was, dealing out contracts and deals to his buddies and those loyal to him on levels that make Bush seem like a Swede when it comes to corruption.
But the hard core leftists won't believe it, simply because they don't want to. They have a rationale to hate Bush and love Hugo, to fight capitalism and advance socialism, even if it doesn't carry out their self-proclaimed aims of helping out the poor and fighting off corruption. But that's the rub of it all. It isn't about the poor, the poor are just pawns in this game. It is again, as it always has been, about making the left feel good about themselves. Reality be damned, freedom be damned, economic growth and prosperity and the abolition of poverty be damned, I want to think of myself as a good person.
Though deep down inside, you wonder if they really believe it themselves.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Case Shiller Index
My buddy Chico is a mortgage broker. His background is both musician and computer genius, so when we debate politics or economics it's basically like talking to a middle schooler. So we had a bet. I bet him that housing prices would be lower in May of 2008 than they are today.
To which he responded "well how are we going to measure that?"
I suggested, "the Case Shiller index."
"Well I never heard of that, sounds kind of bogus. We're not using that."
"OK, what about the OFHEO House Price Index?"
"You know, I never heard of that either and besides which the government isn't taking into consideration what they're appraised at, only what they sell for."
Which is CLASSICALLY leftist. If the source, no matter how authoritative or unbiased
doesn't produce the results you want, then it's biased and unreliable and under the control of George Bush.
So here is a simple lesson in economics folks, especially for all you schmucks in the housing industry that insist there is no housing bubble;
1. CASE SHILLER IS THE AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE FOR HOUSING PRICES, END OF STORY!
2. HOUSING PRICES HAVE GONE DOWN AND WILL CONTINUE TO GO DOWN, END OF STORY!
Here's a spiffy little chart that shows you national and Minneapolis area prices.
To which he responded "well how are we going to measure that?"
I suggested, "the Case Shiller index."
"Well I never heard of that, sounds kind of bogus. We're not using that."
"OK, what about the OFHEO House Price Index?"
"You know, I never heard of that either and besides which the government isn't taking into consideration what they're appraised at, only what they sell for."
Which is CLASSICALLY leftist. If the source, no matter how authoritative or unbiased
doesn't produce the results you want, then it's biased and unreliable and under the control of George Bush.
So here is a simple lesson in economics folks, especially for all you schmucks in the housing industry that insist there is no housing bubble;
1. CASE SHILLER IS THE AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE FOR HOUSING PRICES, END OF STORY!
2. HOUSING PRICES HAVE GONE DOWN AND WILL CONTINUE TO GO DOWN, END OF STORY!
Here's a spiffy little chart that shows you national and Minneapolis area prices.
Monday, September 24, 2007
How to Stop the "It's All About Oil" Argument Dead Cold
I really don't have patience for ignorance or idiocy. I really don't. Thus I lament the loss of my youth when in college I would try to argue with brainwashed skulls full of mush about the merits of capitalism, Libertarianism, the evils of socialism and what have you. Because what is the point? Kids at that age, who are now (perish the thought) adults are so intellectually dishonest that they are going to believe in what they want, regardless of the truth, regardless of empirical evidence, regardless of facts. And I'm not talking religious right facts like "it says so in the bible." I mean like, "the Federal Reserve's 8th district came out with a report" type facts.
But the biggest waste, the most futile mission you could possibly go on is trying to convince a brainwashed dolt that subscribes to the farce that BIG OIL is somehow controlling prices.
A complete waste of breath.
None the less, that doesn't mean you're not going to run into them. And when you do, it is insanely hard to fight the urge to use your superior knowledge to backhand them into reality.
So here is the least painful way you can do it;
Big Wheat.
Yes, Big Wheat.
While the world's leftists are worried about Big Oil, little do they know the true threat comes from Big Wheat. For while Oil has increased 100% or so, it has been nothing more than a diversionary tactic to distract the innocents of the world from the real threat;
Big Wheat.
For wheat has nearly trebled in price!
Wheat producers who are in cahoots with the Bush Administration have been conspiring against the American public to fleece us of our hard earned money to line the pockets of the special interest groups of Big Wheat.
We should pick a day that NOBODY BUYS BREAD! That'll stick it to them! Yes, the Wheat Boycott Day! You see, if we all stop buying bread on one day, then according to some inane, college sophomore, American Idol level of incredibly flawed logic, we'll somehow be able to stick it to those fat greedy corporate Big Wheat bastards! We'll show those corrupt Big Wheaters that we don't answer to Big Wheat!
However, on a serious level, the point you can make (though I doubt it will stick) is that as the global economy has grown, demand for all sorts of foods and commodities has skyrocketed. Not to mention the push for ethanol has allocated more land to corn and less to other grains. These factors have driven up the prices of these commodities at a rate faster than oil.
Of course, such a logical and commonsensical explanation won't hold against the literally delusional, ulterior-motivated leftist thinking. You could show them all the charts and data in the world showing them it's a booming global economy that is driving up commodity prices and they still won't believe.
Big Copper.
Big Aluminum.
Big Tungsten.
All of their prices have increased as fast if not more so than oil.
The truth is they WANT to believe its Big Oil.
And in WANTING to believe, it means they don't really BELIEVE its Big Oil at all
Which means they're intellectually dishonest.
Which means they must have an ulterior motive.
Which, frankly, and simply is that they hate capitalism, want your money and need a villain to rationalize the transfer of wealth.
I really wish it wasn't so simplistic, but it is.
But then again, what can you expect from simplistic minds?
But the biggest waste, the most futile mission you could possibly go on is trying to convince a brainwashed dolt that subscribes to the farce that BIG OIL is somehow controlling prices.
A complete waste of breath.
None the less, that doesn't mean you're not going to run into them. And when you do, it is insanely hard to fight the urge to use your superior knowledge to backhand them into reality.
So here is the least painful way you can do it;
Big Wheat.
Yes, Big Wheat.
While the world's leftists are worried about Big Oil, little do they know the true threat comes from Big Wheat. For while Oil has increased 100% or so, it has been nothing more than a diversionary tactic to distract the innocents of the world from the real threat;
Big Wheat.
For wheat has nearly trebled in price!
Wheat producers who are in cahoots with the Bush Administration have been conspiring against the American public to fleece us of our hard earned money to line the pockets of the special interest groups of Big Wheat.
We should pick a day that NOBODY BUYS BREAD! That'll stick it to them! Yes, the Wheat Boycott Day! You see, if we all stop buying bread on one day, then according to some inane, college sophomore, American Idol level of incredibly flawed logic, we'll somehow be able to stick it to those fat greedy corporate Big Wheat bastards! We'll show those corrupt Big Wheaters that we don't answer to Big Wheat!
However, on a serious level, the point you can make (though I doubt it will stick) is that as the global economy has grown, demand for all sorts of foods and commodities has skyrocketed. Not to mention the push for ethanol has allocated more land to corn and less to other grains. These factors have driven up the prices of these commodities at a rate faster than oil.
Of course, such a logical and commonsensical explanation won't hold against the literally delusional, ulterior-motivated leftist thinking. You could show them all the charts and data in the world showing them it's a booming global economy that is driving up commodity prices and they still won't believe.
Big Copper.
Big Aluminum.
Big Tungsten.
All of their prices have increased as fast if not more so than oil.
The truth is they WANT to believe its Big Oil.
And in WANTING to believe, it means they don't really BELIEVE its Big Oil at all
Which means they're intellectually dishonest.
Which means they must have an ulterior motive.
Which, frankly, and simply is that they hate capitalism, want your money and need a villain to rationalize the transfer of wealth.
I really wish it wasn't so simplistic, but it is.
But then again, what can you expect from simplistic minds?
You Can Contact the Iranian State Newspaper
So after Amedijonmustard makes an ass of himself and gets a little taste of the weakest elements of New York City, the Iranian State media spins it worse than the Democrats ever could and make it sound like we were giving him standing ovations.
You just know that these schmucks (note the Hebrew jargon to provide particular insult to this nazi) know they're lying through their ass, but I think they really think they're fooling their people and us.
How about you send them a message and let them know your true feelings about Amadinihitler?
What a freaking loser.
You just know that these schmucks (note the Hebrew jargon to provide particular insult to this nazi) know they're lying through their ass, but I think they really think they're fooling their people and us.
How about you send them a message and let them know your true feelings about Amadinihitler?
What a freaking loser.
Delayed Death
They always "say" that it takes years for various people convicted of horrible crimes to inevitably get executed. Years after years of appeal racking costs to the tax payer to keep them alive and then post pone their death.
This is the first time I've seen the actual data;
This is the first time I've seen the actual data;
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Some Jim-Dandy Housing Charts
They come from Time magazine, which I know, I know, is nothing approaching The Economist, but I have to give credit where credit is due.
The first one I particularly like because it is (thus far) the only chart/graph/data that shows just how much housing prices in various cities have dropped in real terms. Of course when you compare the gains housing has had in the past 5 years versus what it's lost in the past year, the housing problems seem over-exaggerated.
However, since everybody in the US spends more than they make and rely on increasing asset prices to afford their unsustainable lifestyle, even a slight decline in their asset values can bring about a halt to their spending as well as bankruptcy.
The other question is that's fine prices have dropped by 5% or so, but how much more does it have to go. I'll still sticking by my 20-30% range.
This chart shows you the standard Case Shiller chart that is finally getting some play, but I like the embedded chart showing job growth.
In both instances I would love to revisit these charts a year from now to see just how far housing prices will drop and just what happens to job growth.
But remember, no matter what these charts say, we're not in a housing crash according to most banks.
The first one I particularly like because it is (thus far) the only chart/graph/data that shows just how much housing prices in various cities have dropped in real terms. Of course when you compare the gains housing has had in the past 5 years versus what it's lost in the past year, the housing problems seem over-exaggerated.
However, since everybody in the US spends more than they make and rely on increasing asset prices to afford their unsustainable lifestyle, even a slight decline in their asset values can bring about a halt to their spending as well as bankruptcy.
The other question is that's fine prices have dropped by 5% or so, but how much more does it have to go. I'll still sticking by my 20-30% range.
This chart shows you the standard Case Shiller chart that is finally getting some play, but I like the embedded chart showing job growth.
In both instances I would love to revisit these charts a year from now to see just how far housing prices will drop and just what happens to job growth.
But remember, no matter what these charts say, we're not in a housing crash according to most banks.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The Captain's Report on Vegas
The Captain was up $350 or so.
The Captain decided to try one big bet before he left, because it is afterall Vegas and he wouldn't be returning for a while.
The Captain was then only up $270.
The Captain is now at the airport.
The Captain is half in the bag.
And thus!!!!
The Captain orders all the junior, deputy economists of the male persuasion to buy their beloveds some flowers.
The Captain orders all junior, deputy economists of the female persuasion to give their men a little loving.
The Captain will now board his flight.
The Captain decided to try one big bet before he left, because it is afterall Vegas and he wouldn't be returning for a while.
The Captain was then only up $270.
The Captain is now at the airport.
The Captain is half in the bag.
And thus!!!!
The Captain orders all the junior, deputy economists of the male persuasion to buy their beloveds some flowers.
The Captain orders all junior, deputy economists of the female persuasion to give their men a little loving.
The Captain will now board his flight.
Sarkozy a "Small Man?"
I find it childish that the socialists would mock Sarkozy and take the cheap shot of accusing him of suffering from "small man syndrome."
However, I recall the last time a Frenchman kicked serious ass and took a lot of names was this fellow called Napoleon.
So am I to understand that the socialists in France would now mock their historic great leader?
Or is it akin to the leftists here in the US where our founding fathers were nothing but a bunch of slave owning, religious right wing drunkards?
However, I recall the last time a Frenchman kicked serious ass and took a lot of names was this fellow called Napoleon.
So am I to understand that the socialists in France would now mock their historic great leader?
Or is it akin to the leftists here in the US where our founding fathers were nothing but a bunch of slave owning, religious right wing drunkards?
Friday, September 21, 2007
Another Spoiled Little Brat
First the "Don't taz me bro" schmuck and now this spoiled brat.
I think a new policy should be implemented when dealing with these children, I quote the movie "The Wild, Wild West"
"Mr. West your policy is shoot first, shoot second, shoot third. And then maybe get around to asking a couple questions once in a while."
And then we visit the parents whose jobs are obviously not done.
I think a new policy should be implemented when dealing with these children, I quote the movie "The Wild, Wild West"
"Mr. West your policy is shoot first, shoot second, shoot third. And then maybe get around to asking a couple questions once in a while."
And then we visit the parents whose jobs are obviously not done.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
What's Wrong with this Picutre - Extra Credit
I don't like children, but when I saw a bunch of these at the atrium to the apartment building I grabbed a copy out of sheer boredom.
But then my cunning, economic spidey senses eye caught something.
I have deleted the woman's face simply because she could be a model for all I know and she is not the point. But TRIPLE ECONOMIC BONUS POINTS to the astute junior, deputy or otherwise economist that points out what's wrong with this picture (aside from the obvious that so much attention should not be paid to children)
But then my cunning, economic spidey senses eye caught something.
I have deleted the woman's face simply because she could be a model for all I know and she is not the point. But TRIPLE ECONOMIC BONUS POINTS to the astute junior, deputy or otherwise economist that points out what's wrong with this picture (aside from the obvious that so much attention should not be paid to children)
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)