Economists: Christmas is stupid

From today's WSJ:

Given the fanfare and billions of dollars in spending it generates, you might think Christmas is the best thing to happen to the economy all year. But some economists say we would be better off without it.

In the cold, hard analysis of the dismal science, Christmas is a highly inefficient way of connecting consumers with goods. Squeezing a big chunk of people's spending into a year-end frenzy of gift-buying generates an abundance of ill-considered presents -- millions of unwanted ties, picture frames and toe socks that, had they found the right owners, could have brought a lot more satisfaction.

Economists call that foregone benefit the holiday's "deadweight loss."

"The economy is better off" if fewer gifts are given, says Tyler Cowen, a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., who riffs on economic topics in a popular Web log, or blog, called Marginal Revolution. "Most gifts are not enjoyed much anyway."

I'll disagree. Christmas means buying stupid shit for other people that they don't need. Without Christmas, American consumers would just buy stupid shit for themselves that they don't need. As long as we're becoming a nation of debtors buying stupid shit that nobody needs, we might as well generate goodwill by giving to others.

Susette Kelo vents

Susette Kelo, victim of eminent domain, sent this Christmas card to the local politicians who took her home:

Here is my house that you did take
From me to you, this spell I make
Your houses, your homes
Your family, your friends
May they live in misery
That never ends
I curse you all
May you rot in hell
To each of you
I send this spell
For the rest of your lives
I wish you ill
I send this now
By the power of will

So she's not a poet. It's the thought that counts, and I second that emotion.

Thanks to Mark S. (a defender of the Kelo ruling on federalist principles, though not, I hope, a supporter of politicians taking people's homes for the benefit of big developers) for sending this.

Holiday reading

Bill Fleckenstein is on vacation, but he's opened up free access to his archives.

User name: free
Password: free

United 93 on DVD

I didn't watch United 93 when it came out in the Spring.

I didn't see it, because I didn't want to think about what those passengers went through.

It's on DVD now, and I just watched it via Netflix. I hope that others who are reluctant will watch it as well.

It's a great film about real American heroes. The film is both meticulously researched and riveting. The filmmakers not only studied the historical facts and interviewed numerous participants and family members, but even had many FAA and NORAD personnel portray themselves in the film.

It is educational, enlightening, and moving. See it now.

Worst way to go

3 aboard plane that crashed into sewage tank:

A salvage crew today is expected to lift the remains of a small plane that crashed into a massive raw sewage tank in Gilroy so that coroner's officials can remove the three bodies inside the crumpled aircraft...

On Tuesday, workers drained raw sewage from the 600,000-gallon tank to expose the plane, which had one wing sheared completely off, apparently from hitting a concrete divider within the tank.

After the plane was exposed at the bottom of the 20-foot tank, the surface was deemed too slippery and dangerous to safely remove the bodies, Svardal said.

I just hope they died on impact and didn't drown slowly...

San Francisco logic

San Francisco cops arrest a lot of black people for felonies.

Obvious conclusion: SFPD is racist!

Freaky Sunday

Welcome to Bizarro World. After years of runaway spending from a Republican Congress, the Democrats may be the party to restore fiscal restraint:

Republican leaders left behind just enough spending authority to keep the government operating through mid-February, less than halfway through the 2007 fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Democrats have signaled that when they take control of Congress in January they will extend that funding authority for the remainder of the year based largely on the previous year's spending levels, which will result in many cuts in programs.

The Democrats also will do something that is certain to anger many lawmakers but cheer critics of excessive government spending: They will wipe out thousands of lawmakers' pet projects, or earmarks, that have been a source of great controversy on Capitol Hill. In the past, lawmakers have peppered individual spending bills with earmarks benefiting special interests. But the funding resolution the Democrats intend to pass in lieu of spending bills will be devoid of earmarks.

Among the casualties will be $3 million for AIDS and homelessness programs in San Francisco pushed by House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and $3 million to establish the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York, pushed by the center's namesake, the Democrats' incoming House Ways and Means Committee chairman.

I'll believe it when I see it. But they're at least talking a good game so far.