ARTS & FARCES internet

Today is Grand Old Day in Saint Paul. 250,000 will crowd the street on which I live, listening to live music, drinking lots of beer, and eating lots of street festival food with a definite midwestern twist (we’re talking cheese curds and funnel cakes here, friends and neighbors). By nightfall, the avenue will return to what passes for normal around here and you’d never be able to tell that many people had been here.

See you on the avenue….

By now, news of the first quarter financial results for the U.S. economy, like this Associated Press report, has had time to trickle down, so to speak.

Productivity during the first quarter grew at an annualized rate of 8.4%, the strongest in almost 20 years. This metric is especially interesting in light of continuing large-scale layoffs throughout the various sectors of the economy. As a result of fewer people working, the number of hours worked fell at a rate of 2.1%.

Predictably, stocks rose.

The question that’s not being asked in the mainstream media is, “Who benefited from that astounding productivity boost?” The question’s not being asked because the answer is not pleasant. The answer is the same ugly turd in the economic punchbowl it’s always been: “anywhere but the pockets of those responsible for the gains.”

John Robb, president of UserLand Software—the company that makes the software on which ARTS & FARCES internet runs—has published two interesting and insightful essays about the new economy enabled by the Internet: “The New Economy” and “The New Economy II.” His basic premise is that improved information flow—mostly due to the Internet—has reversed the power relationship between individuals and corporations. While that may be happening, it is premature to claim it has happened.

Robb is generally on the mark with these essays when he states that the new economy isn’t the new economy that corporate America expected. It’s surely dawned on just about everyone with enough eye-hand coordination to wield a mouse that the Internet isn’t a new market, nor strictly a new medium in the most traditional sense.

While agreeing with most of Robb’s comments, I take issue with two of his points: that “wages are up and increasing” and that the market is “merely an abstraction of the wealth creation process.”

Politics are a lot like trains. The Democrat and Republican trains are pulled by sleek and powerful engines fueled by political action committee (PAC) money. In the dark of night about 20 years ago the Democrat train hitched to the rear of the Republican train. Now there’s just the Republicrat train with the Republican engine pulling and the Democrat engine pushing the cars down the track.

Just behind the Republicrat engine at the head of the train is the club car. It’s hard to miss with all of its polished stainless steel, chrome, and glass. There’s a lot of smoke, but not much fire in this car, as it’s the domicile of the old white men of both former parties, the domain of the corporate aristocracy—the wealthiest 10% that own 90% of the country’s wealth.

Behind the club car are a lot of coach-class sleeper cars. This is the middle 60% that believe that if they work harder or catch a break they can take their rightful place in the club car. Of course, the dirty secret is that this never happens; those already in the club car have no intention of letting any of the riff-raff—that is to say, anyone not already among them—though the door. About half of these sleeper cars are comfortably well appointed and about half are tattered and worn around the edges but comfortable nonetheless.

Behind the sleeper cars are the boxcars holding the bottom 25% of the populace. Spartan and bare, these cars are crowded. Because the side doors of these cars are wide open, quite a few passengers are lost as the train pitches from side to side. Smarter boxcar passengers have learned to lean to the left as the train usually lurches to the right.

At the end of the train is the caboose containing a 5% amalgamation of what remains of the free-thinking left. While the rest of the formerly Democratic train was listing hard to the right, the caboose was seeking to balance the whole with a concerted push to the left. This against-the-grain behavior was not appreciated by those in the club car. It didn’t really have enough of an impact to affect the smoothness of their ride, but it did manage to slosh a little of the fine wine in the club-car’s hand-cut crystal goblets that were filled to overflowing.

Alwin Hawkins is a critical care nurse and therefore is on the front lines of the health care battles. He offered some interesting pushback on the article I published recently on the proposed Medicare bill that would increase the level of payment to dialysis centers at the expense of home dialysis.

I didn’t suggest that the reimbursement rates should be cut, just that they shouldn’t be increased, and not at the expense of home dialysis. The corporation that owns the dialysis center I use is looking at an annualized profit (based on Q1 financials) on the order of US$160 million this year.

Here’s how I would support an increased reimbursement rate (subject to change after the Philadelphia subpoena of DaVita records runs its course):