My responsibility

James informed me the other day that I have more readers than I had originally anticipated. This, he tells me, came about as a topic of interest in a company meeting, and a subsequent dissemination of my blog address. As a result, not only do my nearest and dearest have an interest in what I have to say, but apparently so does the entire IT department of my fiance's office. So hello PQAers. Welcome. I hope you like what you see.

Alas, this means I now have a responsibility to post more often than I might naturally. This was, of course, one of my initial motivations for beginning a blog, but it is also something that must be pressed upon me with regularity to result in anything of substance (i.e. posts). Therefore, I encourage anyone interested to scold me regularly to post more frequently.

The best way to do this is to respond to my posts with something interesting, informative, or infuriating (that damn alliteration tickles me every time!).

For instance, in response to Ojiikun: You already know that I am of a similar mind. Of course, teaching Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged this week has only done much to encourage such thinking. I am perfectly aware that the best way to defend the interests of and provide for the poorest of a nation is to increase wealth through productive endeavors. And further that the most effective way of encouraging this is to remove barriers for production, be it through minimizing taxes, removing barriers to entry such as union costs or regulations, or merely leaving people alone long enough to take care of themselves.

However, I still maintain that the market takes time to stabilize or reach an equilibrium in times of crisis. You point merely to the response of the stock market--a rather poor example of a working market--and its slide before the stimulus bill was even passed. The stock market is based on rampant speculation of what people will do in light of available incredibly limited information. The market of goods and services, however, is different in that it aggregates huge amounts of information and results from usually rational and self-interested individuals' innumerable actual actions (Sara, stop with the wordplay, already!). The stock market is a good predictor of how stocks will perform but not of what actual value results from trade. In fact, we may be able to blame a lot of this current economic situation on the speculations of banks and mortgage lenders based on limited and, often, fraudulent information.

Yet, I am aware of the logical inconsistency of passing off future earnings to a present that will only, at best, squander it and, at worst, prevent it from manifesting in the first place. Hence, I titled my last post "Sara's Shame." Though I resist your characterization of the profession of a desire to act as "capitulation to the popular worthlessness or hurtfulness of achievement and enjoyment that is now and forever proposed by those who have little interest in individuals other than themselves and their own nationally perceived usefulness and grace." Those who are proposing plans that involve the sacrifice of countless individuals are not motivated solely by consideration for themselves (though I'm sure Obama does imagine his legacy when he's trying to save the world). They are trying to champion the little guy! They are trying to build up the smallest of men, to enrich the poorest, and cure the sickest.

That, I think may be the problem.

I will point you to two articles that will lay the groundwork for my next post, and allow me to prevent this from being a very lengthy essay.

First: an interview in the New York Times with Zambian author Dambisa Moyo on aid to Africa. (Hat tip: Craig Newmark)

Second: another New York Times link, to Thomas Friedman's editorial column.
(Hat tip: Brad at the Crossed Pond)

Enjoy, and to be concluded.