Enterprises engaged in ethnic minority trade, at the county-level or above, were given tax rebates worth 1.2 billion yuan (157.9 million U.S. dollars) during China's 10th "Five-Year" Plan period (2001-2005)...

Enterprises selling tea to remote ethnic areas were remitted value added tax worth about 50 million yuan (6.6 million U.S. dollars), said an SEAC official.

Producers of necessities for ethnic minority people were also granted loans with discounted interest rates from 2001 to 2005, which saved them 2.2 billion yuan (289 million U.S. dollars), the official said...

Relevant state departments also offered preferential policies for enterprises engaged in ethnic trade, especially producers of Muslim food, tea and rubber overshoes -- all badly need necessities in ethnic areas, to ensure a stable supply of special goods for ethnic minorities, he added.

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is a sentence composed by Noam Chomsky in 1957 as an example of a sentence whose grammar is correct but whose meaning is nonsensical. It was used to show inadequacy of the then-popular probabilistic models of grammar, and the need for more structured models.

Update... Several readers have commented. Victor Colvin:

You know most of those colorless ideas are more of the incremental, and largely irreversible, steps toward socialism. In a decade or two we’ll be scratching our heads trying to figure out what happened and praying for economic growth of 1%.

I don't know how you resisted taking on PK on the content of the piece. He's essentially saying, that Californians manage to use 1/3 less energy than the rest of the country and that is was no big deal to do so - unless you count paying 50% more for electricity than the rest of us. Try raising the price of electricity by 50% anywhere in the country and they'll be howling for his head! But hey, the poor don't mind paying more to soothe Mr. K's conscience.

Stopped into our local Charity Shop to see what “finds” or “object d’arts” were on sale….nothing of any consequence, except a copy of Paul Krugman’s book, The Great Unravelling! Priced at $1.50, hardcover…..it was about 900% cheaper in the Charity Shop than the search I did for its price on Amazon, Books-a-Million and other book websites. Naturally I didn’t buy it...the title itself is redundant. The economy has certainly not unravelled under Bush the Younger!

- Clinton lied under oath to a Federal Grand Jury. (Of course, that’s perjury. Perjury remains a felony.)

- Clinton continues to lie about his 12-year affair with Gennifer Flowers.

- Clinton continues to lie about sexually harassing Paula Jones. (Of course, he paid her $850,000 of hush money.)

- Clinton continues to dismiss the Whitewater scandal as a "land deal where I lost money" - despite the fact that a dozen of his close associates landed in jail over the illegal activities in that deal.

- Clinton illegally obtained FBI files on his political opponents - lied about that, too.

- On the golf course, Clinton has an incredibly difficult time playing his ball where it lies. It’s virtually impossible for him to keep an honest score. His final scorecard is always a good deal better than his real score.

- According to Washington Post reporter John Harris, Clinton was so upset about his inability to lose weight in 2000, that he made his aides release a bogus number after his annual physical to make him five pounds lighter.

In "Scooter Libby and Reputation," columnist Daniel Henninger properly holds Rudolph Giuliani to account for his overzealous prosecution of Wall Street figures in the 1980s, and the irreparable damage done to the reputations of these innocent businessmen. Ironically, in the process of discussing the case of Salim "Sandy" Lewis, one of Mr. Giuliani's victims, Henninger inadvertently underscores his own point when says that Mr. Lewis' "accuser was Boyd Jeffries, the criminal acolyte of famed financial criminal Ivan Boesky." I knew Mr. Jefferies intimately at that time, and I know that he was no "criminal acolyte." He was coerced by Mr. Giuliani by the threat of criminal prosecution for minor technical violations of securities regulations that had never been treated as criminal matters before. He felt he had no choice but to plead guilty to various minor technical infractions, and to help Mr. Giuliani build his case against others, such as Mr. Lewis, who were themselves guilty of similar minor technical infractions. Mr. Jefferies could have fought Mr. Giuliani as others did, but as Mr. Henninger points out, his reputation would have been destroyed, win or lose. It saddens me that Mr. Henninger, in his attempt to rehabilitate the destroyed reputations of some innocent businessmen has further sullied the reputation of Mr. Jefferies.

On the Republican side, Vice President Dick Cheney struck back at criticism leveled against him and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by Senator John McCain of Arizona, underscoring the often tense relationship between the White House and Mr. McCain.

A typical full-time state or local government worker made $78,853 in wages and benefits in the third quarter of 2006, $25,771 more than a typical private-sector worker, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. The difference was $7,604 in 2000. The compensation advantage holds true for all types of public workers, from teachers to laborers and managers.

Democrats have effectively seized on this outrage as more than 30 million Americans will be forced into the AMT by 2010. Yet, late last week I got my hands on data by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) from April 2006 which ran eight different scenarios for cutting the AMT. Disaggregating the data demonstrates the AMT "problem" is a result of the 1993 Clinton tax increase, which all the politicians complaining about the AMT today actually voted for and essentially created this problem.

The 1993 tax increase created this problem two ways. First, the AMT rate was increased from 24 percent to a two rate structure of 26 percent and 28 percent (taxpayers under $175k paid 26 percent and over $175k paid 28 percent). AMT rates rate were increased because at the same time the Congress was raising income tax rates in the regular income tax code. Since taxpayers pay the higher tax bill of the regular income tax compared to the AMT, the increased AMT rates ensured anyone on the AMT continued to pay and put new taxpayers into the bracket.

According to our analysis of the JCT data, by 2016, this higher tax rate added 12.2 million American taxpayers to the AMT rolls. As such, 40 percent of all AMT filers are paying the AMT because of the higher tax rates that Pelosi, Reid, Schumer and Co. put into effect.

Senator Obama is being hailed as the newest and freshest face on the American political scene. But he is advocating some of the oldest fallacies, just as if it was the 1960s again, or as if he has learned nothing and forgotten nothing since then.

He thinks higher teacher pay is the answer to the abysmal failures of our education system, which is already far more expensive than the education provided in countries whose students have for decades consistently outperformed ours on international tests.

Senator Obama is for making college "affordable," as if he has never considered that government subsidies push up tuition, just as government subsidies push up agricultural prices, the price of medical care and other prices.

He is also for "alternative fuels," without the slightest thought about the prices of those fuels or the implications of those prices. All this is the old liberal agenda from years past, old wine in new bottles, a new face with old ideas that have been tried and failed repeatedly over the past generation.

Senator Obama is not unique among politicians who want to control prices, as if that is controlling the underlying reality behind the prices.

That's this year's fresh-faced candidate trying to win over the old nag vote. The 2008 election will decide whether we voters understand that we are in the best economy ever (on Earth?) and that we should vote to extend it. That means Giuliani, Romney or McCain, all of whom have pledged to keep taxes low, preserve free trade and control spending, presuming each of them can be trusted and are able to do so.

Contrast that with the left-leaning policy and rhetorical trends among the Democrats. Not one of them wants to stand in or near the center. Not even Hillary talks about Rubin-mics (even though that is mostly myth and spin); no one celebrates Bill Clinton's decision to support NAFTA, which kept free trade going for the eight years between Bush 41 and Bush 43. Every Democrat wants the primary audience to applaud. Each fears the unions, the silent backers of MoveOn.org. They are the candidates of...what, exactly? Revenge against the majority of Americans who are prospering to varying degrees? Why make "income equality" an issue unless you plan on doing something about it once you have more power?

Every word is calculated to favor tax increases, and disfavor the realistic reining in of programmed benefit growth. Look at question R10: "Do you preter 'benefit cuts' or 'revenue enhancements'?" No mention that only a deceleration of benefit growth is required to stabilize the systen, not outright cuts. Meanwhile, tax increases masquerade as "revenue enhancements."

I'm sure glad that when I get old and feeble-minded this classy organization will be looking out for me -- and figuring out how to screw all the young people in America for my benefit, with whatever lies it takes.

Update... Reader Neal Phenes has a comment on push-polling,

I asked my kids whether they preferred a reduction of their allowance or an increase. I failed to explain that the reduced allowance would make my financial position a lot better. They aren't doddering by any means and they chose an increased allowance. Fancy that!

Viscose filament prices started more rapidly increasing in the past weeks in China with a general rise of 1,000 yuan per ton (20 cents per kilo).

U.S. consumer prices rose more than forecast in January...

The cost of medical care increased 0.8 percent in January, the biggest gain since August 1991, after a 0.2 percent rise in December. Prescription drug costs also rose by the most since August 1991, and physicians' services jumped 1.2 percent, the biggest gain since October 1981.

As pressure grows for the government to pick up more of the nation's health-care tab, new data show its contribution is already at 45% and is expected to approach 50% within 10 years.

The government's widening role in financing health care stems from the recent expansion of Medicare to include prescription drugs, the growth of relatively new initiatives like the State Children's Health Insurance Program, increased spending by enrollees in programs like Medicaid -- which covers many of the sickest patients -- and cutbacks in employer-sponsored health coverage.

I thought Irwin Chusid was only leading a double life -- as both the artblogging chronicler of the great 1940s/1950s artist Jim Flora, and as our "public editor." But it turns out Irwin's is a triple life. He is also a champion of "outsider music," that is, music produced by people outside the mainstream of the art and business of music. He recently gave me a copy of a CD he produced, "Innocence and Despair: The Langley Schools Music Project," the resurrection of recordings from the 1970s of music performed by rural Canadian schoolchildren under the tutelage of itinerant teacher Hans Fenger. The 19 tracks, covers of various pop classics and non-classics by the Beach Boys, David Bowie and others, are surprisingly engaging despite, or perhaps because of, these unpolished and underproduced renderings -- which, while crude, are at the same time actually quite sophisticated. And the CD is aptly titled. The performances burst with the innocent exuberance of the children who sing them and the enthusiasm of the teacher who directs them -- but they are also infused with a haunting melancholy, perhaps an artifact of the echoic environment in which they are recorded, or perhaps reflecting the isolation of the children's rural locale and the sense that, tragically, this music will be the creative high-point of their lives.

It was an interesting exercise in art and cognition to listen to this CD. I couldn't help wonder, as I listened for the first time, whether I would be as engaged if I hadn't been prepped by Irwin to expect something special. What if I'd happened on this music with no context whatsoever -- would I have dismissed it instantly as just a bunch of schoolchildren doing a bunch of pop songs? Or how would I have judged it if my own child were one of the singers? Would that have made me take it more or less seriously as art? I do think there is something special here -- some unique art in the performances and the arrangements. And I don't think it's just my suggestibility. Irwin has played here a legitimate role of the art critic, to highlight for an audience the artistic virtues of something that otherwise might have gone unnoticed. Art does not need to stand on its own, without someone to evangelize for it, in order for it to be art.

The innocent quality of this music performed by children begs other questions. Irwin drew my attention to one particular number, the Eagles' song "Desparado" performed as a solo by a girl who sounds like she's about ten years old. The very fact that the girl probably doesn't understand the meaning of many of the lyrics she's singing gives the performance a mood of loss and tragedy. Yet as I listened, I couldn't help second-guessing my perception of the performance because I knew that its haunting quality was the arbitrary artifact of the singer's age, not the deliberate quality of her art. I kept asking myself how I would react differently if I knew the singer was an adult, who was mimicking for effect the naïve quality of a child's performance. I think I would have liked it more. Isn't using a child to achieve these effects rather like having a 15-foot man play basketball? No skill or art would be required -- he'd just walk up to the basket and drop the ball in. Is there something unfair, or uninteresting, about scoring that way? Or should the audience not care, so long as the point is scored, or the song is sung in a moving way? Interesting questions -- and the fact that this "outsider music" motivates them -- is proof, if any be needed, that this indeed is art.

Update... Reader Kevin Schnaper writes,

I too encountered the "Langley School Music Project" and found it transfixing in a way I didn't expect.

When I analyze it I tend to think some of the hypnotic nature of the recording stems from the fact that there is an inversion going on. The late-sixties-to-early-seventies were a cynical time and the recordings of that era have that feel - fin de siecle - or something psychically fragmenting in their grooves.

But the clear joyfulness of the children as they sing, for example "Good Vibrations," switches the psychedelic aspects of that song off and tunes into what is timeless and innoncent about song itself. That is, singable melody, fun call-and-response, syncopated counterpoint, proper-fitting lyrics, beauty and sadness inextricably linked, the mysteries of love, and always the pure joys of performance. The song itself is stripped bare of its dispiriting era and Brian Wilson's artistic forcefullness and ambitious studiocraft. It is left to just be itself. The Langley recording clears away the cobwebs and the monumentality of it. In short, it's the same song, but all the impurities have been distilled out.

"Desperado" as originally recorded is an "advice song" -- we have a series of suggestions from one friend to the next, and there is the sense that the singer has been through a lot of what his target-buddy currently suffers. There is weariness there, it almost feels like advice offered over a beer. But as sung by a child, the song changes from an exchange between equals to a cry from the young for the old to get their house in order. We get a metaphoric generational plea rather than one-friend-to-another advice. Again, we have a distillation that transforms the meaning of the song.

If every artwork calls for attention, we must consider what is being proffered here. And I think the "Langley School Project" offers a rebuke to where the culture had gone in the 1960s. It is a plaintive cry against a cynical age. And it demonstrates that the cynicism was something of a mask that covered over the true heartfelt quality of the artists of that era.

Nearly a century after it was founded, Israel's first and most famous kibbutz has voted to give up its early socialist ideals and to privatise itself...

In the past the 320 members of the kibbutz saw their salaries paid into a communal account and then received free services and an allowance based on need, usually determined by the size of their families. In future they will be paid varied salaries based on ability not need and, most importantly, they will be allowed to keep them. In return they will have to pay for services such as electricity and water and they will have to pay a progressive income tax into the kibbutz which will be used to support the least well off...

In the past few decades there has been a gradual relaxation of the original communal ideals. Residents have paid for their own electricity for some years, since it was a way to cut costs. Not all members of the kibbutz still work the land, and many are employed outside in industry and business, until now contributing their high salaries back into the coffers of the kibbutz.

For all the talk about a do nothing Congress last year, under the radar screen, Congress passed the Pension Protection Act which will significantly increase defined contribution plans and stock ownership...

The Pension Protection Act made several key changes to defined contribution and defined benefit plans which has forced Morgan Stanley to increase their forecast for net equity defined contribution flows from $11 billion in 2008 to $30 billion. If you are keeping score this is a 172 percent increase in annual net flows. Very positive for growth, wealth creation, and retirement savings.

...First, the legislation made expanded 401(k) and IRA contribution amounts permanent. Originally signed into law as part of the 2001 tax cut these are the only Bush tax cuts made permanent to date and will ensure these flows are not reduced with the rest of the tax cuts expiring.

Second, the legislation removed the barriers to employers automatically defaulting their employees into the 401(k) plan... A number of news reports show a dramatic jump in automatic enrollment since the legislation passed and this will increase the number of people participating in 401(k)’s and the amount of equity flows for markets...

Third, the legislation provides incentives for employers to move the default fund away from an interest bearing money market fund and toward a default stock fund. At the same time the legislation allows the 401(k) provider to provide asset allocation advice. These two factors combined will increase money into the stock market and produce better returns for American workers...

On the defined benefit side employers are being asked finally to realize the true cost of their defined benefit pension plans. So initially employers, save for airlines and autos, will have to increase their pension payments. But once the funds are stabilized in five to seven years many of these employers will shift to defined contribution plans realizing 401(k)’s are much more efficient in both terms of the employers and employees...

Legacies do not have to occur while the President is sitting in the office. The Berlin Wall fell several years after Reagan left office but he is credited with winning the Cold War. Likewise with Bush. The increase in the number of shareholders and wealth creation will occur after he leaves office but it is this very legislation which will be responsible. Incremental changes have turned out to be far more effective in creating the ownership society through Health Savings Accounts, lower taxes on savings and investment, and increased defined contribution incentives.

"...you say we have the two objectives, stable prices and employment -- but one of those might -- I mean, I appreciate the fact that you have two children and you love them both, but I'm afraid that one of them might get a little bit more for Hanukkah than the other if we're not careful."

Thanks to our financial correspondent "Irrational Exuberance" for the link.

Update... A reader points out that Frank is himself Jewish.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:52 AM | link    

Monday, February 19, 2007

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 3:51 PM | link    

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 3:35 PM | link    

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 3:25 PM | link    

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 1:42 PM | link    

There's more...visit the archives!