Mixin’ It UP with Chris Hayes et al Tomorrow AM, 8-10

July 6th, 2012 at 10:22 pm

On MSNBC–see you there!  Sounds like an interesting cast of characters, too.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

8 comments in reply to "Mixin’ It UP with Chris Hayes et al Tomorrow AM, 8-10"

  1. Mitch Smith says:

    Jared- enjoying you on “Up”. Seems as if the Candy Shop owner had totally bought into the “uncertainty” meme and against all logic that you presented he was sticking to it. Amazing how Fox can perpetuate an idea that the entire MSM has glommed onto. Seriously, doesn’t this guy employ mostly minimum wage types that employers hire and shed easily? Wonder what this guy’s average annual employee turnover is? He likely couldn’t put a name on 80% of his workforce in 2014 since I bet at least that percentage of current workers will have cycled out by then. The point is if need be he can adjust employment levels downward to respond to lost demand comfortably by not hiring when employees leave. Part of his defense for the “uncertainty” meme, in the face of what you said about leaving money on the table, was that his accountant was warning him of things coming in 2014 or beyond. Then he gets to the heart of the matter, that demand is the real problem, even though he tossed out the “uncertainty” lie and is convinced that was at least near the top as his problems go. How do people like that stay in business?

  2. Gary Horton says:

    Wondering if you feel your question about leaving money on the table was answered. Seriously – the candy shop owner is concerned about too many taxes, too many fees? Fine – if he has unmet demand, just hire people to generate more revenue, and if he’s running his business correctly, more profit to address the taxes and then some. OK, well what if the extra taxes cut into his margins, such that he actually has less profit if he hires more to meet demand? If that’s the case, this argues that he should lay workers off. This logic leads to the realization he should lay everyone off; clearly that would give him the best profit scenario.

    Bottom line – anyone who runs a business with a willingness to leave money on the table might want to reconsider the strategy.

  3. Fred Donaldson says:

    Thanks for representing the working folks in America with Mr. Hayes. It’s been some time since we had a person, who could speak economic fairness without requiring agreement on a mantra of social issues. That’s the kind of objective economics that can gain backing from all segments of society.

    It should not be a secret (but it is) that fair wages – like the $15 an hour in Australia and France – lead us all to a fair society. When folks of any color or race can afford the house next door, acceptance follows and equal opportunity is real.

    Of course, that also suggests low cost college education, childcare, healthcare and nursing homes, so we have a little left to give to our grandchildren and help to invest in their future. The GOP should love that idea – invest is good, isn’t it? Even for the regular people?

  4. wendy beck says:

    Who created the “uncertainty” Republicans like to blame for businesses not hiring? Republicans have, at every turn, created it. They will try to repeal the Affordable Care Act, they will fight against repeal of the Bush Tax Cuts (for the wealthy), they will fight against stimulus and create another nail biter when it comes to the deficit. The real uncertainty is job uncertainty. Even employed folks don’t know how long a job will last so they delay consuming, thus stalling our consumer-driven economy.

  5. dakinkat says:

    Just watched the show. My head is still spinning based on the comments Karl Smith made. I noticed the look of disbelief on your face. I’m as flabbergasted as you. I can’t believe some one who teaches some kind of economic policy could sit there and say that. I’m a financial economist who teaches corporate finance, financial institutions, and global finance. Smith doesn’t even seem to get basic statistics. Just because rates are manipulated both ways doesn’t mean the series will still mimic a random series which is essential to any truly efficient market. He also doesn’t get that when you’ve got huge corporations using LIBOR as the basis of their discount rate for capital budgeting and other investment decisions at the margin that a single rate can matter. A lot of my research uses the LIBOR as a proxy for a global discount rate. My head is spinning thinking about what this might mean to any assumptions drawn based on a gamed rate. Then, there’s the entire idea that if any assets were misallocated based on this there’s a huge loss of economic welfare. This is a rate used globally. That could mean a loss of economic welfare in a lot of countries. Again, we’re talking decisions based on the margin and not some average of some times they manipulate it up and some times they manipulate it down. Plus, there is a confidence fairy when it comes to investors needing trust in a market. Again, your composure was admirable although it might be because you were so stunned. I don’t think I could have fought off the desire to slap some sense into him.

    • Jared Bernstein says:

      thanks–always interesting to hear dissenting views, but man…that’s some far out stuff! I jokingly predicted to some friends a while back that someone is going to defend the rate-rigging by saying “hey, they rigged it in both directions…what’s the big deal?” And there it is, on morning tv…

  6. Allen says:

    Jared — you were great on Up With Chris today. I am so glad there are shows like this that are thoughtful and that represent something other than FOX’s conservative viewpoint. I just wish more people would tune in.

    This longer, more extended format is really the wave of the future in my opinion. I never watch the conventional Sunday talk shows — there’s never time for an extended debate where claims are supported with evidence. They do more harm than good.

    Thanks again!

  7. oli3 says:

    You were awesome, I agree with the other commenters on that point. However, I wish you could have helped Chris with the comments from Stephen Moore.

    Moore’s insistence that taxes have been going up for the most wealthy was jaw dropping. Krugman’s blog post (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/08/taxes-at-the-top/) entitled Taxes at the Top effectively called out Moore’s lie, but stuff like that need to be anticipated and then rebutted immediately with facts right there on TV.