The president recently spoke to a group of UPS workers in Nevada, where he expressed his wants and desires for the economy. Referring to his SOTU speech, he told the crowd, “…where we’re making stuff and selling stuff and moving it around and UPS drivers are dropping things off everywhere.”
Last time I checked our economy operated on that model, typically called a free market. If the president and members of Congress envision an economy of “stuff,” perhaps they need to get out of the way and let stuff happen. Here is an analysis and some suggestions for the president’s vision:
“Where we’re making stuff…”
Sure, many Americans would love to make stuff or make more of the stuff they already make. However, there are many impediments to making stuff:
“And selling stuff…”
In the world of a complicated and punitive tax and regulatory code, selling stuff is also a challenge. Most people who make stuff wish to sell it for a profit, but not so fast; selling stuff for an unreasonable amount of profit (and has anybody yet defined what is unreasonable?) means being taxed, regulated or even chastised in the next SOTU address. Some members of Congress want to establish a board of “reasonable profits” to impose stiff taxes on oil companies that make excess profits. But what are excess profits? Sure, altruism is needed in this cold, cruel world, but few people will earn a decent living by selling stuff at below cost. (For more insight on why socialism doesn’t work, see my blog post on the Occupy protests).
“And moving it around…”
Moving stuff around is great. In fact, making, selling and moving stuff to other countries’ consumers is a fabulous way to increase Americans’ standard of living, boost the American export base and allow consumers a wide variety of products from all around the globe. It’s called free trade. But according to protectionists, this pesky notion of free trade has its problems. It means that in exchange for selling our stuff to other countries, we get to buy stuff from these countries in return. Some of that stuff may be cheaper than the same stuff made domestically. But protectionists leave out an important part of the bargain. In exchange for locating some jobs in areas where the demand for stuff is high, we allow foreign investors to locate production plants here in America that employ American workers.
And don’t forget, moving domestic stuff is no easy task either. Some states don’t allow stuff from one state to be shipped to another state. Usually stuff containing alcohol falls into this category.
It is time for policymakers to stop preaching and start acting on the government-imposed taxes and regulations that create barriers to making, selling and moving stuff.
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
Posted in Wellness Wednesdays
It’s the time of year when many of us turn our attention to our health. Ok, let’s be honest, by health I mean weight. Now three weeks into my resolution to lose six pounds, I’m down two. Not exactly a stellar performance, but it beats the alternative.
The startling facts are, according to the CDC, 33.9 percent of U.S. adults are obese, and another 34.4 percent are merely overweight. Which leaves those folks at healthy weights in the minority.
There is certainly no shortage of approaches to weight-loss. The multi-million dollar weight loss industry hawks thousands of books, magazines, weight-loss centers, and food substitutes. Our problem is not from lack of information, or even for lack of trying. I know very few people, even in the healthy-weight category that aren’t trying to drop at least a few pounds.
To be fair, the problem for obese people is a lot harder to tackle, it’s not just their imagination. Tara Parker-Pope’s NY Times article, The Fat Trap, explores the frustrating problem that so many people encounter of gaining back weight that they so diligently worked to lose. Turns out it’s not a problem of willpower or discipline. And it also turns out it’s not true that a calorie is a calorie is a calorie.
A typical 30-year old woman who weighs 190 pounds can eat about 2,600 calories a day and maintain her weight. But the same woman who achieved that weight by losing over 10 percent of her body weight will only be able to eat about 2,300 calories per day without gaining weight. Yes, unfair!
To blame are the metabolic and hormonal changes that accompany significant weight loss. So it really is harder for someone to keep the weight off after losing it than it is for someone who never varied from that weight in the first place. To really add heft to the unfairness of it all, this effect on calorie burning may last up to six years.
Which brings me to my six-pound goal. I am not overweight by any measure of the word. But I have consistently gained a half a pound a year for the last 16 years. So I’d rather reverse that course now, before I land in the land of the metabolic catch-22. And for that, I will share a little inspiration, Michael Pollan’s, Food Rules, an Eater’s Manual.
Most of us have figured out that it’s easier to keep up a moderate exercise program consistently than a drastic, complicated, intense one. Well, it’s the same with an eating program. I don’t buy the philosophy that the more complicated it is, the more effective it is. I think we all know what to do, we just need a little reminder.
Michael Pollan’s compact book is just that, a quick reminder of what you already know. The book contains 64 rules, they read much like a series of blog posts. They revolve around the central advice, “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.” The first section defines food. For example, food your great-grandmother would recognize as food, things with ingredients that a third-grader can pronounce, foods that aren’t pretending to be something they are not. The last two sections are on making the healthiest food choices and tips for portion control.
If you, like I, need a little inspiration to keep the resolution you’ve made year after year by following advice you already know, I recommend this short read. It’s not rocket-science, it’s just common sense, something we can all use a little of from time to time.
Related Posts:
Do French Fries Count as a Vegetable?
The Myth of the Skinny Retirement
Can’t keep track of my non-existent posting schedule? Subscribe—it’s free!
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
