For the curious...

Last week, Aaron and I gave a presentation about our father-son experiences at the Top Producer Seminar.  There is a video excerpt here.

For those of you unfamiliar with our backstory, start here, part 1.5*, part 2, part 3 (pdf).

* Oops - forgot one.

It's not the hands...

It's the talking.

(1) Cell phone use damages driving performance almost to the DUI level.
(2) Laws against using cell phones while driving are effective and reduce cell phone use a lot.
(3) Where this happens, there’s no reduction in accidents!
Toward the end of the story we get what I think is the key to the puzzle: hands-free cell phone gadgets, which are legal (but shouldn’t be) everywhere, because talking on the phone with a hands-free device is just as bad as holding the phone to your ear.  The problem with a cell phone in the car is not dialing and fumbling, which after all take only a small fraction of the time required for a phone conversation (and you can do that at a time of your choice), but mental distraction of a particular kind.   This is surprising because listening to the radio, or chatting with a passenger, are not dangerous; why should chatting with someone on the phone be so risky?
To understand why, consider a couple of other things that are dangerous in cars: very young children and loose pets, which both (i) require your attention unpredictably (ii) with no sense of what’s happening on the road ahead that might be more important, and (iii) you know they might do this at any time.  The radio, in contrast, doesn’t have that psychological grip; you might miss a pearl on All Things Considered if you stop listening for a minute, but you know the radio will not be insulted, nor raise its voice insistently.

The party on the other end of the phone conversation is an adult to whom you psychologically owe attention, but unlike the adult passenger, has no idea of what you are seeing through the windshield.  A passenger will subconsciously stop talking if something untoward or just complicated is unfolding on the road ahead, and will expect you to suspend the conversation similarly, so she causes no important distraction at the critical moments when you need to be driving on all neurons, and you are aware of all this. In contrast, the person on the phone can’t do either of these things, and you are aware of that as well.  When you need to navigate a tricky bit of road, there’s no time to ask someone to be quiet, and telling a peer to shut up for a minute, in any terms, is so rude that it absolutely requires an excuse that makes it take even longer (“can you hold on for a minute? one of the kids is playing with my blunderbuss and I think it’s loaded”). [More]

I wonder if farmers are more likely to engage in this behavior due to 1) low-traffic rural roads and 2) auto-steer acclimation. Regardless, it looks like a really bad habit, and one reason some companies like Pioneer (that I know of) strictly prohibit it.

[Update: Great additional info from a commenter below]

Gee, this looks familiar...

How to report the news on TV.





[via sullivan]

Just what I hoped/feared...

The most prominent impression from my hectic schedule at the Top Producer seminar was the jaw-dropping accomplishment and ability of the younger members of our profession there. By adding the Young Farmer session on the previous day, many stayed over into the rest of the program.

Maybe it was because Aaron was with me, I suddenly noticed these younger colleagues, and when conversing with them, I reinforced my belief the biggest challenge facing me and our our farm was leeping up with the competition arising all around us.

In fact, I think it is safe to say one of our worst fears has been realized: the best and brightest have returned to the farm.  And they are quietly accruing by sheer ability and economic advantage the bulk of the market share for farmers.

Although I have been going to the TP seminar for 14 years - all of them I think - it seemed like this year the 5-digit farm (>10,000 A.) was commonplace. At the same time, stories of rapidly shifting acres and a myriad of expansion patterns were represented. There are truly more ways to approach farming than most of us realize.

This may be the true value of this meeting - to at least forewarn the complacent of the depth and power of our competition next door. Simply condemning the level of ambition or greed in our eyes has not altered the increased pace of consolidation.

It is also clear that farms like ours (2100 A) will not be the center of the target for vendors, lenders, or buyers of farm inputs and products. It may not be " grow or die", but it may be "grow or wither".

I'll post more after I do the laundry (often a 2-day job for me) and get the 1099's out. Jan is helping a sick family member. Somehow everyone in our generation has gotten older and is having more health problems.

Please send cookies.

I'm waiting for the Kindle versions...

Truly weird books.

 Nuclear War: What's in it For You

(For engineers) A Stress Analysis of a Strapless Evening Gown

Why Do I Vomit?

What's Wrong With My Snake?

The English: Are They Human?

[Much more for your reading list]

[via presurfer]

Tax cuts and deficit reduction...

For most on the right, the two preferred forms of deficit reduction are cutting taxes they pay and and cutting government payments others receive. That position is no more self-serving than many on the left. The problem is the staggering scope of the deficit will require the worst of both worlds.

A commenter points out that a previous post seems to blame the Bush tax cuts for much of the deficit. True enough, but simply political opposition is not an argument in itself. The Bush tax cuts were time bombs set to go off after many of the authors were outta town (like the estate tax). Or more charitably, based on the assumption of a vigorously growing economy generating lots of extra tax revenue from other sources. The cuts themselves were large, but not historically so.  What they did do is start a precedent of putting the bulk of the costs just after the 10 year budget window used for analysis, so the 10-year cost looked one way, the >10-year cost was ghastly. (Again the estate tax is Exhibit A)

The problem with the Bush tax cuts is they were they were unfunded - there was no way to recover the lost income. While the idea of tax cuts paying for themselves has been pretty well discredited, tax cutters still cling to the idea than putting people's money back in their pockets somehow will address a government income shortfall.

The recent analysis by Mr. Page at the Congressional Budget Office dismisses the idea that tax cuts may actually improve the government's fiscal situation. Even in his most generous scenario, only 28 percent of lost tax revenue is recouped over a 10-year period. The United States, it seems, is firmly planted on the left side of the Laffer Curve. Recent experience corroborates this prediction. In the second quarter of 2001, just before the first of President Bush's tax cuts took effect, federal receipts from personal taxes accounted for 10.3 percent of the economy. By the end of the post-recession slump, receipts had dropped to 6.4 percent. But in the third quarter of 2005, with the economy booming, they were still under 7.5 percent - an enormous difference. In dollar terms, federal receipts from personal income taxes, at $802 billion in 2004, are still lower than they were in 1998 ($826 billion) and much lower than in 2001 ($994 billion). ...[More from a 2005 analysis]

This is the CBO talking - not some left-wing think tank either. We're on the wrong side of the Laffer curve - even if it is true.

So how do we shrink the deficit? Over the next months some unavoidable truths will become clear.

First we have to address entitlements.  I've already expressed my skepticism over meaningful spending cuts - nor have I seen any deficit hawk running for office provide a list of specifics. I'll start taking complainers seriously when they outline their cuts with numbers and also indicate some reason on revenue.  For example, I advocate means-testing all entitlements, including Medicare (if universal coverage is available).

Second we will need new revenues - taxes. It simply isn't going to happen otherwise.

Rosanne Altshuler, Katherine Lim and Roberton Williams, all of the Tax Policy Center, recently ran some calculations on how Congress could cut the deficit to a sustainable 2 percent of gross domestic product. Their models had major fiscal-consolidation efforts starting in 2015, “to give the country time to regain its economic footing.”
They simulated what would happen to tax revenues under three basic policy proposals: raising all tax rates proportionally; raising only the top three income tax rates; and raising rates only for couples with income over $250,000 and singles with income over $200,000 (the only group of taxpayers President Obama said he would raise taxes for). The authors also tried eliminating or limiting itemized deductions, and seeing how these policies would interact with current plans for the tax system, like extending most of the Bush tax cuts.
The results were “discouraging,” showing that the government would have to impose almost ludicrously high rates in order to make a dent in the deficit. You can find a summary here.

The moral? However painful they may be, spending cuts will probably be necessary. And a new source of revenue may also be inevitable. [A little more]

If you follow the link above to the study you can read the stunning numbers for yourself. I will be posting about what new taxes we might see proposed - namely a VAT and how it might affect us on the farm.

My point is after we have spent this year being angry, the deficit will patiently wait, and all the political retribution in the world isn't going to stop its growth.

If we want to reduce this deficit, cutting taxes is something we used to do.

Uh-oh...

I read this story over the shoulder of a guy on my plane from Des Moines yesterday.

A national weather forecaster told a farmland values seminar Friday that Iowa can expect another wet spring and a possible delay in the planting season, another cool summer and a possible early frost in the fall at harvest time.

"It looks like there will be pressure to get the crop planted as early as possible," said Drew Lerner, president of World Weather Inc., a weather forecasting service in the Kansas City area. [More]

Have a great Sunday.

Valentine's Day is coming...

Just the thing for hoops fans of all genders.

Your pick-up games can keep going after the sun goes down with this glow-in-the-dark basketball net! Perfect for unlit courts and driveways. Net uses sunlight to illuminate up to 8 hours. [More]

 Romance is not dead.

It's merely comatose.

The phony deficit outrage...

Suddenly we're all about the federal deficit and how to get our national budget under control.


Yeah - right.

Obviously, folks have not been paying attention to how we got here and even more to what it will take to get back to even mild deficits.  It feels too good to be angry and believe in funny arithmetic. In fact, getting mad is now seen as more "real" than offering solutions other than nonsense quick fixes.

Consider Gov. Tim Pawlenty, stealth candidate for President.

The centerpiece of Pawlenty’s “plan” is this:

Balancing the budget will require some tough decisions. Congress must reduce discretionary spending in real terms, with exceptions for key programs such as military, veterans, and public safety. The Congress must also reject costly new spending initiatives, like new health care entitlements.

Collender writes that “Someone needs to tell Pawlenty that discretionary spending except for ‘military, veterans, and public safety’ is less than $400 billion a year.” On January 4, the Wall Street Journal reported that “The federal government’s budget deficit reached $389 billion through the first three months of fiscal 2010, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said Thursday [...] The deficit reached a record high of $1.4 trillion in fiscal 2009, more than triple the previous high set just the previous year.”

Try running the math on that. [More]

In a feeble attempt at fairness, this delusion is widely held.  All of us have things we hate in the federal budget and want to see cut to balance the budget.  It's just that this list is too short and too tiny.

Recalling what really is driving our deficits is more uncomfortable.

[More]

Deficit concern will vanish like a bad dream if your slice of the budget is up for the axe. Will farmers support cuts in ag spending?

No, seriously.  Won't they be more likely to point our what a drop in the bucket our ~$20B is? So if we assume anybody with say, a budget claim of less than $20B can use the same excuse, what can we cut? [Late link to ag budget post]

This is what sooner or later will have to be recognized by even the loudest critic. And as conservative Bruce Bartlett pointed out, thinking we're going to cut much from the federal budget is wishful thinking - regardless of how much political power either party has.

Every time I try to explain why our fiscal problems are so deep that higher revenues must be considered, some nitwit always says to me, “Why don’t we just cut spending?” It’s as if the choice between raising taxes and cutting spending is no more difficult than the choice to buy melon or cantaloupe for breakfast. What these nitwits implicitly assume is that we live in some kind of dictatorship where Ron Paul has Stalin-like power and spending can be cut with the wave of a hand, where no one has to worry about getting the votes in Congress for politically painful legislation, where the budget largely consists entirely of foreign aid, where there are no entitlement programs or interest on the debt to pay, and where the primary beneficiaries of spending (the elderly) aren’t the largest and fastest growing voting bloc in America. [More]

I don't know what economic conditions will exist when Americans get serious about cutting their own entitlements and raising their own taxes, but that is who will have to make the decision. More frustrating to me, I'm not really clear at all on how I can even create modest defenses for my welfare and wealth during such conditions.

We simply have devised too many ways for too few people to bring legislative efforts to a halt, allowing the status quo to continue into those dangerous places.

Whom unmerciful disaster...

Followed fast and followed faster. 

The Poe Toaster didn't show.

It is what Edgar Allan Poe might have called "a mystery all insoluble": Every year for the past six decades, a shadowy visitor would leave roses and a half-empty bottle of cognac on Poe's grave on the anniversary of the writer's birth. This year, no one showed.
Did the mysterious "Poe toaster" meet his own mortal end? Did some kind of ghastly misfortune befall him? Will he be heard from nevermore?

"I'm confused, befuddled," said Jeff Jerome, curator of the Poe House and Museum. "I don't know what's going on." [More]

I love Poe's work.  His life story is seldom recounted accurately, but he was even more colorful than the legends. 

However, the man could marshal words into cadence and rhyme like nobody else, IMHO.

I'll be out in the workshop, honey...



Even the noise! I think I'm going to faint...

[More how-to]

I could see the irony...

After listening last weekend to Dan Basse (AgResource) talk about 2B+ corn carryovers in 2011 and beyond, and sensing the slightly higher chance of a return to recession as stimulus spending falls from favor, I find one policy switch reason by the NCGA on climate change legislation curiously timed.

 "Finally, this analysis indicates HR 2454 will result in diverting productive farmland into afforestation (newly planted forests) or perennial grasses solely to gain offset credits. Although our analysis shows dramatically less acreage diversion than noted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, it still diverts land needed to feed and fuel a hungry world and therefore affects both food security and energy security." [More]

This is not unreasonable by any means, but how high would the corn carryout have to get (or how low would corn prices have to drop) before cries for "set-aside" begin bubbling up in meetings?  

For that matter, how many of us are looking forward to the release of Conservation Reserve acres?

The large decline in winter wheat seedings may be problematic for corn and soybeans and other spring planted crops. The six million acre decline in winter wheat seedings along with additional acreage released from the Conservation Reserve Program opens the door for large increases in the acreage of spring planted crops. While a few more corn and cotton acres may be needed to accommodate the expected rate of consumption in 2010-11, a large South American harvest implies no need for more soybean acreage. Favorable growing conditions, then, could result in a surplus of one or more crops in 2010.

An additional concern for crop prices is the continued lackluster performance of the national economy and the persistently high unemployment rate. These factors do not bode well for demand prospects for agricultural commodities for food or fuel consumption. The lack of economic growth, along with emerging indications that Iraq could substantially increase oil production over the next several years, may prevent an increase in crude oil prices that would support the biofuels industry. [More]

As usual Darrel states it about as dryly as humanly possible. (I fell asleep in mid-sentence).  But it is also is an indicator he may be closer to the truth than most.

What if we get a really good growing season? I don't think E-15 will soak up that much corn very quickly, if at all. (Good article in current issue of Farm Futures - not available on line yet). I had a discussion with a broker from TX who said his getting gas retailers to switch will not be a cakewalk. It does present some infrastructure puzzles. More tanks? Tough beans for pre-2001 car owners?



My guesses are 2.2B bu. and/or $2.40.

Great finishes...

I have admired the work and artistry of Placido Domingo over all the tenors I have heard, including Pavarotti.  Now at 69, he is extending his career as a baritone - and apparently successfully.

And does Domingo ever die! He doesn’t just gradually sink to the floor holding on to the sturdy soprano to cushion his fall. He pitches headlong toward the prompter’s box (from which helpful whispers emanated all night long).
It was a thrilling end to an unusual evening.
Having made his debut as a tenor in 1968 at the Met, Domingo now made a second debut as a baritone in the same week he celebrated his 69th birthday. His mental and physical fitness are amazing; his technique and energy, simply beyond compare. (In between shows, he’s also conducting another mid-tier Verdi piece, “Stiffelio.”)
Burnished Sound

That burnished sound of his filled Simone’s often wistful music without seeming underpowered in the middle range. When in the last scene Domingo sang of the sea and remembered his great deeds, so did we. [More]

I am wavering between the model of a graceful, timely exit from the professional scene and seeing how long I can contribute anything worthwhile. Examples like Placido Domingo make the latter look appealing.

After all, 69 isn't that far away.

Looking the wrong direction...

Its about time for inflation to start pumping up prices.  Isn't it?  We've thrown money at banking problems and wars and infrastructure.  That liquidity should be chasing goods and services. But now we see...

The 0.2 percent increase in prices paid to factories, farmers and other producers followed a 1.8 percent jump in November, according to Labor Department data released today in Washington. The gain was more than anticipated and reflected higher food costs. Excluding food and fuel, so-called core prices were unchanged.
An unemployment rate projected to average 10 percent this year and excess capacity are giving companies room to hold the line on prices. Few signs of inflation will allow the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates near zero in coming months to help fuel the economic recovery.

“The substantial slack in the economy will keep inflation subdued this year,” Ryan Sweet, a senior economist at Moody’s Economy.com in West Chester, Pennsylvania, said before the report. “As the recovery gains momentum in 2011 then inflation will be more of a concern and that’s when we expect the Fed to aggressively raise interest rates.” [More]

Moreover, the persistent threat of close-to-deflation isbecoming unnerving to even many inflation hawks.

First, a little bit of inflation might not be so bad. Mr. Bernanke and company could decide that letting prices rise and thereby reducing the real cost of borrowing might help stimulate a moribund economy. The trick is getting enough inflation to help the economy recover without losing control of the process. Fine-tuning is hard to do.
Second, the Fed could easily overestimate the economy’s potential growth. In light of the large fiscal imbalance over which Mr. Obama is presiding, it’s a good bet he will end up raising taxes for most Americans in coming years. Higher tax rates mean reduced work incentives and lower potential output. If the Fed fails to account for this change, it could try to promote more growth than the economy can sustain, causing inflation to rise.
Finally, even if the Fed is committed to low inflation and recognizes the challenges ahead, politics could constrain its policy choices. Raising interest rates to deal with impending inflationary pressures is never popular, and after the recent financial crisis, Mr. Bernanke cannot draw on a boundless reservoir of good will. As the economy recovers, responding quickly and fully to inflation threats may prove hard in the face of public opposition.

Investors snapping up 30-year Treasury bonds paying less than 5 percent are betting that the Fed will keep these inflation risks in check. They are probably right. But because current monetary and fiscal policy is so far outside the bounds of historical norms, it’s hard for anyone to be sure. A decade from now, we may look back at today’s bond market as the irrational exuberance of this era. [More]

The most important issue is the one contained in the previous quote - excess capacity.  Coupled with the mysteriously strong growth in productivity (I blame our Borg-like connectivity) we simply don't need to hire or invest to produce more until much later in any expansion.

This also means the next most likely moves from an even more chaotic Washington  - tax cuts - may not do much other than really fire up the deficit.  One caveat: a payroll tax cut (SS, Medicare taxes) - which many have been advocating would be about as stumulative as anything possible in that category.

Across-the-board tax cuts would do less to stimulate the economy because much of that money would be saved rather than spent, CBO said. A tax cut for lower-income households would generate between 30 cents and 90 cents for every lost dollar in revenue, while a tax cut for everybody, including the affluent, would only generate between 10 cents and 40 cents in activity. [More]

But angry voters wanting lower unemployment and lower deficits may be in for a long wait on both fronts. And hence, investors anxious about inflation could be putting their eggs into the wrong basket.

Indians and chiefs...

This e-mail from an old Navy buddy (and my former boss):

I just finished reading my January  “Seapower 2010 Naval Almanac”, in which the Navy League national president, Dan Branch, laments that the current building rate will not maintain the CNO’s stated goal of 313 ships. He writes that the current building rate will sustain a long term level of only 240 ships.

In the back of the same magazine I found the listing of flag and general officers in the Navy Department. I counted 325 flag officers. Am I the only one who thinks this ratio (313 to 325) is really screwed up? What do you say we trade some flag officers for some ships?

I rely on my friends to tell me when I am mistaken. What do you think?

J-----

P.S. I also counted the blue-water, power-projection ships (i.e. FFGs or better) and came up with less than 200.

P.S. I can remember when I was working in the Pentagon and John Lehman was trying to build a 600 ship navy. At the same time we were joking about the Air Force having more General Officers than aircraft. Now, I guess the joke is on us.

[Note: for non-navy folks, flag officers are admirals]

It reminded me of the curious tipping point academia reached a few months ago.  I cannot find the link, so feel free to be skeptical, but it explained there are now more tenured professors in administration than teaching.

This pattern, I think asserts itself in protected sectors. Certainly the military is one - who would argue for defense frugality with 2 wars in progress?  Another sector has been higher education which has been able to operate outside the normal laws of supply and demand for some time.

That may be ending for universities as both endowments and state aid are plummeting.

An economist with the state's Legislative Finance Committee met with the University of New Mexico's Board of Regents this week and suggested nearly in $10 million cuts.
The LFC said that UNM could make up some of those losses by raising tuition.
High education could be hit hard when lawmakers convene for the legislative session in Santa Fe next week to cover the state's multi-million dollar budget deficit.
One proposal calls for steep tuition increases at universities and two-year colleges.

Included in the recommendation would be a two percent wage cut for all state employees, including teachers and professors. [More from one of any number of similar stories]

There tends to be a delayed reaction to economic downturns in certain sectors. As the slow budget cycle of state legislatures grinds to an ugly end, higher education is facing some seriously bad news. 



Meanwhile, the military is obviously adding forces at the top.

A movie I'd like to see...

I'm not sure what the loss of floor trading means to our mental images of "The Market".  Maybe nothing, since it has essentially already occurred.  But judging from the previews on this documentary, ours is not the only threatened lifestyle in agriculture.

Chicago’s open-outcry nostalgists can now watch their slow- motion obituary on film. “Floored,” a documentary that premieres in the city tonight, captures the fading swagger of its exchange pits as electronic trading takes over.
Traders and former traders in the film recount drug-fueled road trips with prostitutes, living in mansions, and a crash that included divorce and having to take a $400-a-week job.

The numbers in Chicago’s pits peaked in 1997, with about 10,000 traders flailing their arms with buy and sell signals in a daily scrum of sweating and shouting, said Steve Prosniewski, a trader who’s one of the film’s producers. Less than 10 percent of those remain, he said. [More]

More immediately for the media is what "visual" to use to express the idea of the market. Floor trading was great economic theater, and a bunch of guys sitting at computers doesn't convey the same idea.

Maybe that's a good thing.  Our markets are now less like casinos and more like eBay perhaps.

Real men...

Remove their own appendix.

When the preparations were complete Rogozov scrubbed and positioned himself. He chose a semi-reclining position, with his right hip slightly elevated and the lower half of the body elevated at an angle of 30°. Then he disinfected and dressed the operating area. He anticipated needing to use his sense of touch to guide him and thus decided to work without gloves.

The operation

The operation began at 2 am local time. Rogozov first infiltrated the layers of abdominal wall with 20 ml of 0.5% procaine, using several injections. After 15 minutes he made a 10-12 cm incision. The visibility in the depth of the wound was not ideal; sometimes he had to raise his head to obtain a better view or to use the mirror, but for the most part he worked by feel. After 30-40 minutes Rogozov started to take short breaks because of general weakness and vertigo. Finally he removed the severely affected appendix. He applied antibiotics in the peritoneal cavity and closed the wound. The operation itself lasted an hour and 45 minutes.¹² Partway through, Gerbovich called in Yuri Vereshchagin to take photographs of the operation.

[More of an unbelievable but true story]


I took a splinter out once...

What he said - Episode 12...

Stumbled over this - loved it.



Truth be told, I think it's a little early be assigning moral value to a phenomenon we barely can describe, let alone predict.  For my part, since I'm at the age where memory itself is a fading memory, Google has been an enormous crutch.

I don't begrudge folks new knees - what's wrong with an artificial memory enhancer?

[via boingboing]

You can't go home again...

At least not very easily.

I had a wonderful visit in Saskatoon, SK thanks to gracious hosts, enthusiastic listeners, and remarkably mild weather.

But traveling back to the USA was something else.  I was aware that new security procedures were in place, but in case you have a trip coming up, let me 'splain what you're facing.  Keep in mind these steps are only on the way back to the US - not going.

• No carry-on luggage.  So plan on spending $20 (NW/Delta) for checking your roll-on.
• Because of the above restriction, you can't just whiz into a kiosk to check in since you need to get a luggage tag and turn it in.
  
• No large computer cases - mine just made it.
• I think they have the magnetometers set on "stun" because I've never had my watch or belt trip the alarm anywhere. Otherwise security screening is pretty much as before.
  
• After you clear security and head for your gate, there will be another obviously hastily created security check which entails the following:
• Emptying everything from your pockets.
• Removing belts, sweaters, and I think I saw heavy jewelry removed.
• A very thorough pat down by a security personnel.  They make a point to tell you they are using the backs of their hands to feel your pockets.  
• A vigorous groping of your shoes, collar, and beltline.
• Inspection of the soles of your shoes (which you had just removed a few minutes ago).
• Complete examination of the contents of your purse, computer bag, etc. - as in opening pill bottles, detailed examination of your computer, and making sure your small tape measure is really a tape measure.
• Repeated questions about liquids of any kind.
  
• After you have made it to the plane and taken off, brace yourself for the last 30-45 minutes. Nothing can be on your lap during that period.  I couldn't read my Kindle, or use the computer.  No tray tables, drinks, coats, blankets, etc.  (I'm not sure about books, but the guy next to me put his away.)
• No moving from your seat for any reason. (They warn you ahead of time)
• OK - you've arrived home (MSP in my case).  You go through customs/immigrations and pick up your checked baggage and then you...
• GO THROUGH SECURITY AGAIN. Even if you're just leaving the airport, I think, because I didn't see any other exit. Shoes, computer, liquids, etc.
  

[More official stuff here]

I hope I don't get in trouble telling you what happened, but I haven't seen any directives or received any instructions not to divulge what occurred, and everybody else was chattering to the folks who met them.  Other experiences are similar.  The new directive may also kill in-flight wi-fi just as it was getting going.

So, does this effectively kill off in-flight wireless internet services such as GoGo? What about in-flight video, like the Boing Boing Video channel on-board Virgin America, or Direct TV presentation of 24 hour news channels like CNN or MSNBC?
For what it's worth, when I flew back into the US on Saturday on an international Delta flight, the WiFi service which had been promised on the flight was disabled for the entire flight. When I asked attendants whether internet access was simply not working, or had been disabled, two attendants replied that WiFi is typically only offered during the last hour of the flight, and would not be available at all because of restrictions on "last hour" acvitity.

Some bloggers did apparently cross a line when they published an internal TSA directive.  

Soooo, if you don't hear from me for a while...

Anyhoo, after a million air miles, I'm really not complaining. But even though I noted this development last month, living with it is an adjustment.  Be prepared. 

I'd honestly allow an extra hour before takeoff coming home.

This explains the remote control behavior...

Y-chromosomes (that's us, men) evolve faster than X-chromosomes.

The Y chromosome, found only in males, has evolved faster than expected in humans and chimpanzees over the past 6 million years since the two species emerged from a common ancestor, researchers report.
The new study challenges the widely held belief that the mammalian Y chromosome is slowly decaying or stagnating.
The Y chromosome is present in males (who have one Y and one X chromosome) but not in females (who have two X chromosomes).

"The region of the Y that is evolving the fastest is the part that plays a role in sperm production. The rest of the Y is evolving more like the rest of the genome, only a little bit faster," study first author Jennifer Hughes, of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Mass., said in a news release from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Hughes is a postdoctoral researcher in the lab of Whitehead director David Page. [More]

Oh yeah - we're about change. 

Agri-skepticism abounds...

While waiting for the much-anticipated January reports on crop sizes and stocks, I was cruising around other strange ag econ output and found this:

The prices paid for corn by grain‐based ethanol production plants and other users of grain varies across the Midwestern United States. This article shows the overall patterns and trends in weekly corn prices in the major states producing grain ethanol since early October of 2006. Discussion will focus on the trends in prices for each state relative to the average weekly corn prices across the Midwest, including the states of Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Nebraska and Kansas. If corn input prices are changing relative to the Midwest average, it may indicate either increasing or decreasing competition in their state corn markets over time. [More (pdf)]

This curious study is interesting on several levels. First and foremost is what (if anything) can be concluded from this statistical comparison.  Observe the (to me) unexpected regional differences.

I'd appreciate other input here, but it appears to me that the oft-stated goal of plunking ethanol plants in the Western Corn Belt mostly strengthened prices for areas that constructed fewer - like Illinois.

The authors add - wisely, I think - a pretty strong caveat to the result.

This preliminary analysis indicates that some states that have been heavily involved in grain‐ based ethanol production have seen a relative increase in their cash corn prices in comparison to other states in the U.S.. For instance, relative corn cash prices in Illinois and eastern Iowa have increased in comparison to corn prices across the broader ethanol production region. Conversely, relative corn prices in western Kansas, South Dakota, and arguably Nebraska have declined in comparison to the overall average. Most notable is the drop in the relative prices for corn in western Kansas from fall 2006 to the present.
In the future, more comprehensive analysis of this issue needs to be completed, adding in cash market prices for ethanol, dried and wet distillers grains, soybean meal as well as futures market prices for ethanol, and RBOB gasoline.

Their conclusion above (my emphasis) is pretty shaky IMHO given the use of the word "some", as displayed in this final map:

Western Iowa become synonymous with ethanol construction. At least it seemed on track to reap basis and demand benefits on par with eastern IA. While all corn prices have risen as ethanol demand gobbles 5B bushels of output, do these charts suggest that the price increases were not necessarily linked to the investment in the plants themselves?  Is there any trend at all regionally? If so does it mean anything?

In other words, is it possible the coops in SD and IA just added to my ECB price advantage, while we largely passed on building our own plants?

Again, I'm not sure that is the conclusion here, but if not, what the heck is their point?

But back to the reports this morning. Once again, market observers are picking their jaws off the dirt and zeroing in on another adjustment possibility from NASS and USDA.

Record large corn and soybean crops this morning came with a big asterisk: USDA said it will re-survey producers in states where the corn harvest was not finished when the December report was conducted, and also in some states in the South where soybean harvest was delayed.

The corn states subject to a recount are Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, North and South Dakota and Wisconsin. [More]

I'm going to wait and see how corn trades today and over the next few days.  I'm frankly looking for signs of low confidence in government reports and/or fundamentals being overwhelmed by other factors.  Of course, this is the data selection bias, but we were heavily sold going into this report, and I have a hard time even suspecting I might have been right.

But both these reports suggest to me a hardened ag audience that greets academic and government output to new levels of scrutiny and criticism. This is healthy, and I think the best way to raise the performance of those agencies whose public mandate is to provide industry data. 

2009 just won't go away...

On my way to Madison, WI today, two events reminded me.

1. Saw a guy finishing harvesting a corn field - had about 30 acres to go.
2. Called a friend to catch up.  He was in a bin trying to load frozen chunks of corn heading south from a bin that got a little warm over the last month.  Just smelled it yesterday.

Guess who's busy checking our bins?

Right - Aaron.

Fun in frigid temps...

Who needs heat for having fun?  Frozen soap bubbles.




[More curious freezing fun]

Also remember: at -40℉/C* spit will freeze BEFORE IT HITS THE UMPIRE!

*The answer to many pop physics quizzes.

If you don't know me or like my comments...

I may have remarkably sound judgment.

Not really, but I have struggled through the intensely cerebral and math-strewn "Expert Political Judgment" by Philip Tetlock, it would seem fame and acclaim are no proof of accuracy.

I had seen Tetlock's work cited by many political writers and my son gave me the book for Father's Day.  (Yup - just now reaching the end.)

[More]

Long story short(er):  Tetlock measures with scrupulous efforts for objectivity, whether "talking heads" add value to political discourse.  His meticulously (the book actually ends at p. 238 with another 80 pages of appendices, bibliography, equations, etc!) foot-noted answer:

Indeed, one of the more disconcerting results of this project has been the discovery of an inverse relationship between how well experts do on our scientific indicators of good judgment and how attractive these experts are to the media and other consumers of expertise.

Another reviewer points out this is hardly a surprise - at least to psychologists and political scientists. He also points out clearly how adding TV and an entertainment aspect to the business of punditry can be unhelpful.

The expert-prediction game is not much different. When television pundits make predictions, the more ingenious their forecasts the greater their cachet. An arresting new prediction means that the expert has discovered a set of interlocking causes that no one else has spotted, and that could lead to an outcome that the conventional wisdom is ignoring. On shows like “The McLaughlin Group,” these experts never lose their reputations, or their jobs, because long shots are their business. More serious commentators differ from the pundits only in the degree of showmanship. These serious experts—the think tankers and area-studies professors—are not entirely out to entertain, but they are a little out to entertain, and both their status as experts and their appeal as performers require them to predict futures that are not obvious to the viewer. The producer of the show does not want you and me to sit there listening to an expert and thinking, I could have said that. The expert also suffers from knowing too much: the more facts an expert has, the more information is available to be enlisted in support of his or her pet theories, and the more chains of causation he or she can find beguiling. This helps explain why specialists fail to outguess non-specialists. The odds tend to be with the obvious. [More]

This struck home.  At USFR or at live FJ events, we smile inwardly when an interviewee or speaker issues a startling prediction or explanation.  It's good TV.  But is is good for our viewers/attendees?  Often I would say it adds little, based on Tetlock's work. But until information consumers express their desires for different or more useful communications, this is pretty much what we have to deliver to stay in business.

I have noticed in my own information-filtering, I am discounting more familiar opinion-vendors and actually constructing predictions and world-views based slightly more on contrary evidence and/or less analyzed data.  If experts really aren't, then we all can be.

Not just customers...

Too often we in agriculture tend to look at China as simply an enormous market for say, soybeans or pork waiting to be exploited.  This is short-sighted and simplistic to say the least.

They are also increasingly powerful players and strong competitors as well.  And with their rapid economic growth, they are market forces to be reckoned with.  One recent example having an impact of California farmers is the garlic bubble.

China, already beset by a worrying real estate bubble, is now grappling with surging prices for a dinner table staple closer to home – garlic.

 

China is the world’s largest producer of garlic. They are in the middle of a boom. Wholesale prices rocket as much as 15-fold since March in large cities such as Beijing, forced up in part by a combination of reduced acreage being planted by local farmers because of the recession – and, far more probably, a belief that garlic can keeping away swine flu.

Schools have been hoarding garlic for pupils to eat because of its reputed properties in warding off swine flu. The China Daily has reported that a high school in Hangzhou in eastern China, bought 200 kg of garlic and made students eat it at lunch to keep healthy.

Jerry Lou, Morgan Stanley China strategist, who has been gathering intelligence from the country’s biggest wholesalers, said speculators, financed by the abundant liquidity sloshing around the country, had moved into the relatively small market and manipulated prices.

 

He said, “You need a warehouse, a lot of cash, and a few trucks. That’s how it works. Basically, what you do is try to arrest as much supply as possible then you bid up the price. Moving garlic from one warehouse to the other, you make millions of dollars.” [More]

Adding nine zeroes to any market quirk causes big ripples. Moreover I think due to cultural differences and poor intelligence gathering, our business community - including farmers - will be scrambling from time to time to cope with the irrationalities of their underdeveloped internal and external commercial structure.

 

The next bubbles may not be in the "rich" world, but the "growing" world. Those of us who can react swiftly may be able to profit by paying as much attention over there as our own backyard.

Makes me proud to be a grandpa...

OK, I'll admit it - Jan and I are flat out having too much fun playing in the rain here in Puerto Rico with the guests of Pioneer for me to post much.

However, this is a great dinner table story to pass along.

It's late into harvest and Grandpa (80+) is helping his his sons to finish. He leaves home for the field about 6 pm.  When the sons wrap up for the night, hours later, Grandpa is unaccounted for.  Consternation ensues.


Fields and sheds are searched.  His cell phone is called repeatedly.  The routes he might have taken are retraced several times.


Finally the sheriff is called and an official search begins.


Anxious family members call frantically back and forth as the drama plays out.


About 11 pm. Grandpa shows up at home, more than slightly surprised by the ruckus.  All is revealed.

It seems G had decided - on the spur of the moment - to attend a remedial driving course surreptitiously to avoid have a recent red-light infraction show up on his driving record and start his children wondering about his ability to drive. (During which he thoughtfully shut off his cell phone)



(It gets better.)


Who should also be sneaking into the 4 hour lecture-punishment but his own grandson who  - for remarkably similar reasons was attending the same course.

That's a bonding moment, folks.

(For once I'm not making this up.)

Old money, old brains...

As I was doing the usual first-of-the-year stuff at my small community bank - setting up astronomical lines of credit, filling my file with financial reports, etc. - when our conversation turned to the problem the bank president anticipates with elderly people rolling over CD's.

With current rates for a 1-year CD in the vicinity of 1.6%, savers who rely on that fixed income are getting pretty desperate.  Too many, she worries, will opt to leave it in an interest-bearing checking account until something better comes along. Not only is that of course worse for earnings (about 0.6%, I think), it leaves the money way too accessible for her comfort.

She's not alone in that concern.

Mike Konczal today comes up with something which in and of itself is reason enough to set up a Consumer Financial Protection Agency: ageing boomers. As David Laibson notes,

the prevalence of dementia among Americans “explodes” after age 60, doubling every five years to more than 30% of the population over age 85.

These individuals are sitting ducks for predatory financial-services professionals, and it’s entirely right and proper for the government to step in and stop such thievish firms from extracting huge chunks of elderly people’s life savings.
The fact is that choosing a financial advisor is just as hard as picking stocks, and it’s statistically inevitable that millions of cognitively-confused Americans will choose badly. That’s not really their fault, and the CFPA, among other institutions, should hold all financial advisors to a strict fiduciary obligation, cracking down hard on those who end up costing their clients large amounts of money. This is not a role that bank regulators can or should have, and I certainly have no faith in institutions like Finra to grow any teeth when it comes to such matters.

So let’s get a CFPA up and running soon: the rich are becoming old fast, and that’s a potentially explosive combination. [More]

To add to the danger, increased financial regulation is introducing new paperwork, which, while trying to protect both savers and borrowers adds another layer of explanation for the finance industry. All the time the general atmosphere of general distrust on conservative media (which is popular with older folks) provides a backdrop for bad decisions by the elderly with their money.

Other countries are struggling with the same problem of how to protect older citizens without infringing their rights - or at least too much. More information (transparency) doesn't appear so far to be a magic bullet.

A better example is the market for annuities. Unlike health care, providers can offer identical products; it is simply a series of payments made to the annuitant. If two insurers have the same credit rating, their probability of defaulting should also be identical. Thus the price they offer for a particular product should be roughly equal. This has traditionally not been the case.

In America this may be because so few people buy annuities; the market is very thin. In Britain people with private pension accounts are required to buy annuities, but there still exists a wide dispersion in annuity prices. To increase transparency the Financial Service Authority (FSA) website offers annuity estimates from highly-rated insures. I just checked the price of a life annuity with an inflation adjustment. I found a 22% difference in monthly pay-out, for the same premium, between the highest and lowest offer. That is a 22% difference in monthly income for the duration of a pensioners' retirement!

It could be that pensioners do not bother to check the website because they take the annuity offered by their pension provider. Providers sometimes offer a loyalty rate or facilitate the annuity purchase. Perhaps prices will converge as more people retire and receive more education. But so far the evidence suggests the benefit of transparent pricing is limited, particularly when insurance companies are involved. [More]

I'm afraid not simply questionable investment salespeople, but charities and advocacy groups will intensify their focus on our aging Boomers and their considerable wealth.  The results will not be pretty.

This could impact farmland and elderly owners - both positively and negatively for farmers. Very old owners tend to be reluctant to make tenant changes, and frankly are often taken advantage of by operators.  More than one career I have seen ended when a landowner death brought an end to an operation accustomed to obsolete (highly favorable) rental terms.  And more than a few of us pray for landowners who hang in there until we are retirement age.

But at the same time, it does afford some scarce tenure security in highly competitive markets.  I could also see farm management companies marketing as heavily into this group as financial advisers are doing for the elderly.

All the more reason to constantly work on deepening your personal as well as professional relationship with your landowners.

And to get our wealth in the control of a younger trusted brain while we can still think at 100% (or as close as we normally get).

Maybe the rhuburbs are over...

Even though the flood of 1031 money seems to have abated with the recession, enough pure investment dough has poured in to make up the difference, if not add to, the non-farmer demand for ownership of land.

Early in the decade, so-called 1031 land swaps — named after the section of the IRS code allowing land exchanges to avoid capital gains taxes — fueled the land market in many areas, even though commodity prices didn't justify them.

“I was more concerned about land prices tumbling then than now,” Schnitkey says. “As the urban market for neighboring farmland dried up 1031 exchanges, we could have seen the market decline markedly.” [More]

But oddly, even while observers saw alarming losses of farmland to housing encroachment, it would appear the outmigration of urbanites was already reversing.

A new study by the Brookings Institute offers an analysis farmers need to ponder.

D. Migration to exurban and newer suburban counties dropped substantially, while it brought about unexpected “windfall” gains in many large urban cores.

Within metropolitan areas, suburban and exurban areas often benefited most from the mid-decade housing boom. There, new housing construction flourished as easy credit became available, especially in the Sun Belt where new jobs were plentiful. Yet the most recent migration data show that these same outer portions of metropolitan areas took the greatest hits as overall migration dried up.
Based on a system that classifies large metropolitan counties by the relative urbanization of their populations, throughout the entire 2000–2008 period, emerging suburban and exurban counties expe- rienced greater domestic in-migration than typically closer-in, mature suburban counties (Figure 8).11 Core and high-density counties actually lost domestic migrants on net each year.
But the disparity between the urban and suburban counties reached its peak in 2005–2006, and narrowed greatly in the following two years. Growth from in-migration declined significantly in both emerging suburban/exurban and closer-in mature suburban counties. Meanwhile, the rate of domes- tic out-migration from core and high-density counties more than halved, as these areas apparently retained more residents who might have previously decamped for fast-growing suburbs.
These broad patterns, aggregated from all large metropolitan areas, play out more distinctly in par- ticular areas (Figure 9). Among large urban areas, the cities of New York and Boston, and Cook County, IL (which contains Chicago), all showed marked reductions in net out-migration after 2004–2005. Philadelphia’s net migration decline eased over the course of the decade. Outflow from Los Angeles County (which contains the city of Los Angeles) moderately significantly as well, though more recently. And San Francisco actually shifted from net out-migration throughout the decade to net in-migration in 2007–2008.
In contrast, fall-offs in domestic migration are evident in peripheral suburban counties within the metropolitan areas of Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., Dallas, and Houston, among others. New York’s suburban counties counter this pattern as they tend to show either reduced migration losses or increased gains in 2007-2008. At the other extreme is Atlanta—an area that displayed metropolitan- wide migration declines in 2007–2008. There, 21 of 26 metropolitan counties showed reduced migra- tion gains over the period.
Overall, these patterns reflect broader trends occurring within major metropolitan areas nationwide, wherein cities and core counties are either losing fewer or gaining more migrants than at mid-decade, when the hot housing market seemed to accelerate a rush to the suburbs and exurbs. Some of these shifts involved new migrants from outside the metro area landing in the exurbs and suburbs. However, the bulk of the movement to newer outer suburbs and exurbs represented local movers, from inner parts of the same metropolitan area, radiating outward. [More]

The graph they included is note worthy for when the peak occurred - not after the collapse of the stock market, but closer to the time of increased transportation (fuel) costs. It could also be the distance/value ratios reached their tipping point, and houses could not be priced low enough to compensate for commuting costs.

[The black line is most pertinent to farmland]

To be sure, outmigration still is occurring, but at a decreasing rate, lowering the pressure on farmland conversion. My guess is, at least for the next decade or two, the flamboyant "swap ratios" for farmers in the paths of development will become much tamer, perhaps even rare, as enormous inventories of land still need to be utilized.

Yet to be measured well is how the singular durability of farmland prices encourages outside investment for asset value protection in wealthy portfolios.

Can we measure enough?...

There is a growing uneasiness that technology is creating forms value that are not captured by GDP figures or other standard economic measures of well-being.  This is sometimes seen in debates over income inequality when critics point out how much better life is for the relatively poor - the Walmart assertion.

But what about the revolution in media, such as well, this blog? Assuming (and this is a leap, I'll grant you) some value comes from my pecking away, it sure does not move the GDP meter at all.  No ads, no income, no economic tracks at all.  From my own perspective, the stuff I read easily now that used to be hidden in a haystack of information or physically inaccessible does improve my life in many ways, so should a flat or slow growing GDP be the single arbiter as to whether my life is getting better?

But it’s also insane not to realize that non-commercial endeavors have real value that doesn’t show up in national account statistics. If anything, people on the left should be eager to embrace the point that the market value of an activity isn’t the correct measure of its social value (a cure for baldness, for example, would be much more lucrative than a cure for malaria).

Of course this has always been the case. But one important consequence of the rise of the digital era is that it’s now much, much, much easier for goods produced on a non-commercial basis to be distributed. Yale professors have always been giving lectures, but now the lectures can go online. People have always performed music for their own entertainment but now it’s fairly easy to record that music and ship it all around the world. People have always wanted to show off their knowledge and engage with communities of interest, but now they can write Wikipedia articles and post on blogs.

To an extent this kind of thing can reverse some traditional thinking about certain policy questions. Traditional analysis, for example, treats leisure as a kind of private consumption good. If you’re doing work for money, then by definition someone else thinks it would be useful to them for you to do the work. You, in addition, presumably want the money. Thus when people are inspired to go do paid work, rather than sit around the house enjoying themselves, they are creating social value. Internet distribution of non-commercial production changes that calculation. If people are using (some of) their leisure time to contribute to open source software projects, to write interesting blogs, to post videos on YouTube, to record music, to write Wikipedia articles, etc., then value is being created for others. [More]

One of the great challenges to measuring how we are doing as individuals, or an industry (agriculture) or even a nation is capturing all the consequences of our policy and personal choices in some metric we can at least track over time. More and more, I suspect our standard accounting of such trends is slipping further from adequate.

If you like to read to children...

Maybe this unique service will help you stay connected with your special little child when you are away:
A Story Before Bed.


We are just scratching the surface of what high-speed broadband can add to our lives.

One of these years...

I have got to stay awake until midnight.

Great New Year's Eve photos.

The taxes of sin...

In what could be a test analog for a carbon (Pigou) tax, the Russian government is slapping heavy new taxes on vodka.

Minimum prices for vodka have been introduced as part of President Medvedev’s campaign to combat alcoholism at a time when Russians traditionally drink heavily.
The price of the cheapest half-litre vodka bottle will nearly double to a minimum of 89 roubles (£1.82). Shops in Moscow carry a wide selection of vodka, with luxury brands priced at more than ten times the new minimum. Elsewhere, the cheapest vodka can be bought for 51 roubles.
The lengthy new year and Orthodox Christmas holidays in Russia, which last from January 1 to 11, are traditionally marked by increased alcohol consumption. The bottles in the form of Russian traditional Matryoshka dolls are part of a museum illustrating the development of the drink since the 15th century.
Successive Soviet and Russian leaders have tried to reduce the country’s drinking habit. In August, Mr Medvedev ordered tough measures to curb alcohol abuse after official figures showed that the average Russian drank 18 litres of pure alcohol each year. Since then the duty on beer has been tripled.

Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, declared a war on alcohol abuse in 1985, ordering dramatic cuts in the production of wines and spirits and introducing strict controls on public consumption. It led to a surge in illegal production of low-quality, home-brewed drink and damaged Mr Gorbachev’s popularity. [Apologies for a complete excerpt]

I don't think the current Russian administration is quite as worried about popularity as Gorbachev should have been.  But the pattern merging from tobacco, seat belts, and now liquor is to point to evidence of rising health care costs and consequences to enact taxes designed to change behavior in areas often considered moral ground.

To be sure, the Russian alcohol problem is long-standing and severe. I remember reading Hedrick Smith's The Russians, in which he learned the savage lesson of what is was like to drink with Russians.  Also the crippling agony of a vodka hangover, although research suggests this impression may be simply due to the staggering amounts Russians drink, rather than the actual form.

Regardless, I wonder if this will also turn out to be a significant revenue source for the government. 

At the same time, even Brits, whose imbibing habits over-matched a certain young ensign back in the day, are taking notice of the medical aftermath.

According to a recent report by the NHS Confederation and Royal College of Physicians, a mammoth share of NHS’ cost for injuries and illness goes to the Britain’s binge-drinking ‘epidemic’, which sucks a whopping £2.7 billion every year.
The rather disquieting report has clearly revealed that the country’s heavy drinking culture is putting “unsustainable burden” on the healthcare system, with the staggering cost of rampant boozing treatment having increased more than twofold as compared to the five-year back figures.

The report further added that the escalating levels of heavy drinking are responsible for creating a crisis that might spell a substantial increase in related diseases in the coming ten-year period. [More]

 One aspect of this is certainly the major health issue involved, but what I find interesting is the growing tendency to tax rather than forbid. This is my preference for tackling our marijuana issue, as well.

It's crossed the mind of a few CA politicians, as well.

A California state assemblyman from San Francisco has introduced legislation that would legalise and tax marijuana, a move he hopes will help shore up the state's dire finances.
The bill by San Francisco representative Tom Ammiano, would legalise the cultivation, possession and sale of marijuana by people 21 and older. It would charge growers and wholesalers a $5,000 (£3,400) initial franchise fee and a $2,500 annual renewal fee, and would levy a $50 per ounce fee on retailers.
The law, which would make California the first state to legalise marijuana, would inject an estimated $13bn a year in revenue into California's empty coffers. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday signed a $130bn budget that raises sales and income taxes, and dramatically slashes spending. States across the country are facing massive revenue shortfalls, as income and real estate tax receipts fall and outlays for unemployment insurance and health coverage rise.

"It is simply nonsensical that California's largest agricultural industry is completely unregulated and untaxed," Marijuana Policy Project California policy director Aaron Smith said at a news conference announcing the bill. "With our state in an ongoing fiscal crisis — and no one believes the new budget is the end of California's financial woes — it's time to bring this major piece of our economy into the light of day." [More]

I think there is evidence to suggest such policies actually do curb such activities - smoking rates have dropped, for example (at least until tobacco companies lowered prices to change the economics). Moreover, the uncertain results of the enormously expensive "war on drugs", especially the disproportionate amount of resources aimed at pot smokers does not offer much health care cost justification.

As health care cost impact becomes more a factor for all kinds of policy decisions (undoubtedly more will be coming on meat and fat consumption, for two examples), a slow sea change to taxation instead of enforcement could be good for public budgets and personal liberty.