Tag Archives: GPI

GDP or GPI? – My metric is better than yours.

Simon Kuznets at Wharton

As any freshman economics student should know, the Gross Domestic Product, GDP, is a measure of spending, derived from the Gross National Product, GNP, defined by Simon Kuznets during the Depression (click here for econlib).  GDP is, at best, an indirect measure of wealth.  The Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI, defined by Think Progress in 1995, measures genuine progress.

Consider the case of Joeseph Q. Bloggs, MBA, J.D., Esq., an investment banker. Bloggs has a J.D. from Harvard or Yale, an undergrad degree from Princeton, Dartmouth, Cornell, or another ivy league school, and a high school diploma from the Citadel or an acclaimed private school. As with his colleagues on Wall Street, he is self-proclaimed “Master of the Universe.” He leaves work one night after negotiating a highly leveraged hostile takeover, buys a Lamborghini, and rents the time of an expensive “friend.”  He buys her an expensive outfit, and takes her to dinner at an the Four Seasons, or a similar expensive restaurant.  He has a few drinks before dinner, a bottle of wine with dinner, and a glass or two of port after dinner.  On the way to the Hamptons, he crashes his Lamborghini into a Ferrari driven by another lawyer / banker / actor / “Master of the Universe.”

Continue reading

Keynes, Reluctance to hire, & 21ST Century Energy

John Maynard Keynes, in black and white, because some ideas are.

in black and white, because some ideas are.

Tweet Follow LJF97 on Twitter   During the Great Depression the Classical Economists said “Unemployment is voluntary. Business owners will not voluntarily keep the means of production idle.”  While he had been a student of classical economics, John Maynard Keynes observed that the data didn’t fit the theory. And, he reasoned, if the observable data don’t fit the theory, the theory must be flawed.   “Business owners are risk averse,” he saw. “A employee needs to be productive, needs to make widgets. But if no one is buying widgets, then contrary to classical theory, factory owners will fire workers and keep capital idle rather than hire workers to create excess inventory. That’s just common sense.”

We see this today.

When unemployment was low, for example in the United States during the tech boom of the 1990’s, people acted on the premise that “There is so much work that we could hire and good people and train them.”  Today hiring managers seem to be acting on the premise that “There are so many people looking for work that they can wait for the perfect candidate.” Perfection being unattainable, jobs go unfilled. This is ok, in this context, because

  • “Budgets are tight.”
  • “The future is uncertain.”
  • “Money not spent on a new hire can be saved or used to pay down debt.”

Keynes also observed that the government is an employer that does not need to worry about going out of business. Building infrastructure is government employment that is investment for the future. These observations are as valid today as they were 80 years ago.

Continue reading

Egypt, Wisconsin – It's the Economy, Stupid

Image of the James home

The James home, Knoxville Biz.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is trying to stimulate the economy by eliminating corporate income taxes and regulations on businesses and cutting taxes on wealthy people (click here or here). These kinds of activities do stimulate GDP.  Here’s how.

Wealthy people, like Lindsay Lohan, Brittney Spears, Mel Gibson, and Charlie Sheen have people, including paparazzi and media people following them around.  That costs money. They do things in a spectacular way,  and when they do stupid things in a spectacular way they have lawyers get them out of trouble. Economists call this “multipliers.” The lawyers, paparazzi and media folks need to eat, sleep, rent hotel rooms, etc. And they don’t camp out and chow down on toast, water, and dried fruits and nuts. Celebrities often require high powered consultants from the sex and pharmaceuticals industries.  When they trigger rapid increases in the entropy of hotel rooms, by “trashing” them, carpenters, electricians, decorators, architects and others need be hired to restore the room – all this costs money, and stimulates GDP.

When regulations are lax or eliminated businesses regulate themselves.  This stimulates GDP.  Consider the recent GDP stimulus of Wall Street, when those now-legendary credit default swaps raised real estate values (until they crashed). Similarly, when industries are releived of the burden of environmental regulations, they create products which increase GDP and pollution which is not counted in GDP.  When the pollution is cleaned up, at taxpayer expense, the GDP again increases. We see this dramatically in Tennessee, at the site of the Kingston Steam Plant. When a flood released 1.2 billion gallons of toxic coal ash sludge from the coal-fired power plant, December, 22, 2008, the cleanup costs were added to the bills of the people who buy power from the TVA.
Continue reading

Utah Refinery Blast

Utah-Woods-Cross-798169Via TheStandard.Net, By Loretta Park (Standard-Examiner Davis Bureau), (click here for article)

South Davis Metro Fire Agency Deputy Chief Jeff Bassett said the explosion occurred because a pipe carrying hydrogen and diesel overfilled and sent some of the product onto the ground, where it pooled. It found an ignition source, a furnace, which caused the explosion.

This is what economists in the Neoclassical school call an “externality.” The costs of the disaster are borne by the citizens, not the oil company or the refinery. These costs actually add to the GDP. Economists in the Ecological school, at for example the Gund Institute at University of Vermont or the students in the Marlboro College MBA in Managing for Sustainability, argue we should use the Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI, not Gross Domestic Product, GDP (defined here and described here.)

From WikiNews: Burst pipe probed in Utah refinery blast as questions asked over safety

See also Damage To Homes From Refinery Blast Larger Than First Thought viamid-Utah Radio News;

OSHA Levies a Record Fine against Oil Giant BP from OMBWatch.

This in the immediate aftermath of OSHA’s record-setting proposed fine of $86.7 USD against BP for for a 2005 explosion which killed 15 workers and injured 170. See Steven Greenhouse, The New York Times, October 30, 2009, Record OSHA Fine Against BP

Over Texas Refinery Explosion.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administrationannounced the largest fine in its history on Friday, $87 million in penalties against the oil giant BP for failing to correct safety problems identified after a 2005 explosion that killed 15 workers at its Texas City, Tex. refinery.

We take the liberty of reproducing Greenhouse’s excellent piece in full:

Record OSHA Fine Against BP Over Texas Refinery Explosion, by Steven Greenhouse, New York Times, October 30, 2009.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration announced the largest fine in its history on Friday, $87 million in penalties against the oil giant BP for failing to correct safety problems identified after a 2005 explosion that killed 15 workers at its Texas City, Tex. refinery.

A series of investigations attributed the March 23, 2005, explosion to overzealous cost-cutting on safety, undue production pressures, antiquated equipment and fatigued employees — some who worked 12 hours a day for 29 straight days

The fine is more than four times the size of any previous OSHA sanction.

Federal officials said the penalty was the result of BP’s failure to comply in hundreds of instances with a 2005 agreement to fix safety hazards at the refinery, the nation’s third-largest.

According to documents obtained by The New York Times, OSHA issued 271 notifications to BP for failing to correct hazards at the Texas City refinery over the four-year period since the explosion. As a result, OSHA, which is part of the Labor Department, is issuing fines of $56.7 million. In addition, OSHA also identified 439 “willful and egregious” violations of industry-accepted safety controls at the refinery. Those violations will lead to $30.7 million in additional fines.

Contacted Thursday night after federal officials disclosed the OSHA citations to The New York Times, BP said it was disappointed.

“We continue to believe we are in full compliance with the settlement agreement, and we look forward to demonstrating that before the review commission” which has the power to modify OSHA penalties, BP said in a statement.

BP said the penalties related to a previously announced disagreement with OSHA as to whether BP was complying with the 2005 settlement agreement.

“While we strongly disagree with their conclusions, we will continue to work with the agency to resolve our differences,” the company said, voicing dismay that OSHA was announcing the fines before the review commission had given the matter full consideration.

BP added that it takes its “responsibilities extremely seriously and we believe our efforts to improve process safety performance have been among the most strenuous and comprehensive that the refining industry has ever seen.”

BP says that since the explosion it has spent more than $1 billion to upgrade production and improve safety at the refinery.

A series of investigations attributed the March 23, 2005, explosion to overzealous cost-cutting on safety, undue production pressures, antiquated equipment and fatigued employees — some who worked 12 hours a day for 29 straight days.

The explosion was caused by a broken gauge and flammable hydrocarbons that were overflowing from an octane processing tower, which lacked a flare system to burn off volatile vapors. Those escaping vapors were ignited by the backfire of a nearby truck.

In addition to killing 15 people, the explosion injured 170 workers and obliterated 13 employee trailers and damaged 13 others, some as far as 300 yards away. The Texas City facility is capable of refining 475,000 barrels of crude a day and is located on a 1,200-acre site some 35 miles southeast of Houston.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has repeatedly said that “there’s a new sheriff in town,” signaling that she would take a more aggressive approach in enforcing wage and labor laws, after what she said was lax enforcement under President George W. Bush.

But one department official said that the record penalties assessed against BP were not an effort to send a signal to industry, but a straightforward move that punished a company with a long record of moving slowly to address safety problems.

In the 30 years before the 2005 explosion, there were 23 deaths at the Texas City refinery.

One Labor Department official said BP was likely to seek to have the fines reduced by appealing them, first to the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and then perhaps in federal court.

Federal officials say they expect BP to dispute that the company was required to do all that OSHA said and that it had failed to meet the deadline to remedy problems.

Six months after the explosion, BP entered into a settlement with OSHA in which it agreed to pay a $21.3 million fine, then the largest in OSHA history.

The previously highest fine was an $11.5 million penalty ordered in 1991 against the Angus Chemical Company and IMC Fertilizer Group, operators of a Louisiana fertilizer plant where an explosion killed eight workers and injured 120.

As part of the settlement, BP also promised to commission an independent audit and to take actions to eliminate potential hazards found in the audit, which was conducted by the AcuTech Consulting Group.

One Labor Department official voiced dismay that BP had four years to correct the problems identified after the settlement, yet OSHA still found hundreds of violations.

BP has already pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the explosion and agreed to pay $50 million, the largest criminal fine ever assessed against a company for Clean Air Act violations. Those violations included failing to maintain the safe startup of processing units and the mechanical integrity of the refinery

Since the explosion, BP has settled more than 4,000 civil claims, paid from a $2.1 billion fund it set aside to resolve claims.