Who Owns Your Tickets: You or Ticketmaster?

Want to see the Phoenix Suns play the New Jersey Nets on Monday night at the Prudential Center in Newark? Worried about getting a ticket at the last minute? Worried about getting a ticket you can afford at the last minute? Well neither are a problem.  

In fact, you can get tickets for less than you'll pay for the gas to drive to the stadium, less than your parking and less than your beer or hot dog - go to StubHub and you can buy tickets starting at $1.98 in the upper corner. 

Want better seats? No problem, you can get 2 courtside tickets for $1,250 each. You can get tickets for $100, $40, $10; and other tickets every price range from $1.98 to $1,250.  Got a large group? No problem, you can 22 seats in the same row for $7 each. 

Worried about buying tickets online through StubHub? Well, don't, they offer a full guarantee. 

Have season tickets for the Nets, but can't attend the game on Monday night, and want to sell your tickets at the last minute for a competitive price?  No problem, sell it on StubHub.  Or if you don't like StubHub's pricing, selection, service, guarantee or fees, go to a competitor like SeatGeek, which offers tickets to the Nets-Sun game from $3 to $1,378.  Or go to TicketCity or TicketsNow (525 tickets listed between $6 and $310 for Monday's game) or one of the other many competitors in the online ticket marketplace.  

Seems great to have a liquid, safe, competitive, consumer-driven secondary market for tickets, doesn't it?  Sure does if you're a fan who wants to buy or sell tickets to sporting events or concerts, but probably not so great if you're a ticket monopolist like Ticketmaster, which has recently tried to introduce new paperless ticketing.  If successful, that would effectively kill the secondary market for ticket resales on websites like StubHub, and even possibly end ticket re-selling (or gifting) among individuals, including family members.   

You can find out more at the Fan Freedom Project website, which outlines some of the consequences of Ticketmaster's attempts to introduce restrictive paperless ticketing:

1. As a fan buying a restrictive paperless ticket, you cannot give your ticket to a friend if you suddenly cannot attend a game or concert.

2. If your grandmother buys you a restrictive paperless ticket to an event for your birthday, she’d have to meet you and stand in line with you at the venue or pay another service fee to transfer the ticket to you.

3. Season ticket holders for sporting events with restrictive paperless tickets would not be able to sell their extra tickets, nor could they give them to charity, without paying an additional fee.

U.S. Manufacturing: More Output, Fewer Workers

I have featured the graphs above before on CD, and they were the basis for this op-ed in today's WSJ, "The Truth About U.S. Manufacturing" (also available here). 

See Dan Ikenson's related post on the Cato blog, he's done some great work on this topic, here's what he says:

"It can’t be emphasized enough how important it is to present such illuminating, factual, compelling analyses to a public that is starved for the truth and routinely subject to lies, half-baked assertions, and irresponsibly outlandish claims about the state of American manufacturing."

Is It A Mancovery or a Mancession?

What does this woman pictured above have to do with the graph below? Find out here at the Enterprise Blog.

Great Interactive Map of China

Pictured above is map of China from The Economist (interactive version here), showing how the economic output of individual Chinese provinces would compare to the GDP of entire countries.  The interactive version also allows you to compare GDP per capita, population and exports.  

HTs: Robert Kuehl and Colin Grabow

An Unsustainable Public Worker Gravy Train Bubble

Andrew Biggs (AEI) and Jason Richwine (Heritage) provide evidence in today's WSJ of the "public worker gravy train" in California, where government workers are compensated up to 30% more generously than their private-sector counterparts in large private companies.  Reasons for the huge public-sector premium?  They point to three sources:

1. Public-sector pension programs are more generous than those in the private-sector. 

2. Public-sector medical benefits, both while working and during retirement, are more generous for government workers than comparable workers in the private sector.

3. Government employees have much greater job security than workers in the private sector, equivalent to a 15% compensation premium. 

MP: Taken together, those additional, and very generous non-wage benefits for government workers in California translate into a whopping 30% compensation premium, i.e. "gravy" (paid for by Golden State taxpayers of course), compared to total compensation at private firms (controlling for age, education, experience, etc.).    

The chart above compares jobless rates between private and public sector employees nationally, on an annual basis back to 1976, and shows that private sector workers face an average unemployment rate (6.6%) that is almost twice as high as the average rate for government workers (3.4%).  The fact that government workers are 50% less likely to be unemployed in any given year than private sector employees (because they work in a "recession-proof industry") is part of the reason that Biggs and Richwine find a 15% compensation premium for government workers.  

Commentator Mike Rosen describes the "public worker gravy train" as "unsustainable bubble" in today's Denver Post:

"Several financial and economic bubbles have popped in recent years. Now, the bubble of unsustainable compensation levels for federal, state and local government employees is bursting.

Once upon a time, those who opted for a career in what used to be called "public service" did so understanding they'd trade off lower pay for more job security and less performance pressure than in the private sector. Nowadays, government employees are not only better paid than the private sector average but also enjoy far better health insurance at lower costs along with lavish retirement benefits, the product of rapidly expanding and aggressive public sector unions that have formed an incestuous relationship with the politicians they fund and elect.

The problem is particularly acute at the state and local level, since those governments have to balance spending against current revenues. They can't run deficits like the feds. And in this economy, the spending gaps are way too large to be closed with tax increases without making the economy even worse, resulting in yet lower revenues."

Government and Private Unions Are Not the Same

Private-sector unions have been losing both membership and power, while government, public-sector unions have been gaining political muscle and membership.  In 2009, for the first time in history, there were more members of public-sector unions than private-sector union members, and unionized government workers outnumbered their private-sector counterparts by more than half a million (see chart above).  

Jonah Goldberg makes some excellent points in his LA Times editorial today ("Public Unions Must Go") about some critical differences between public- and private-sector unions:

"Traditional, private sector unions were born out of an often bloody adversarial relationship between labor and management. Mine disasters were frequent; hazardous conditions were the norm. In 1907, the Monongah mine explosion claimed the lives of 362 West Virginia miners. Day-to-day life often resembled serfdom, with management controlling vast swaths of the miners' lives. And before unionization and many New Deal-era reforms, Washington had little power to reform conditions by legislation.

Meanwhile, government unions have no such narrative on their side. Do you recall the Great DMV cave-in of 1959? How about the travails of second-grade teachers recounted in Upton Sinclair's famous schoolhouse sequel to "The Jungle"? No? Don't feel bad, because no such horror stories exist.

Government workers were making good salaries in 1962 when President Kennedy lifted, by executive order, the federal ban on government unions. Civil service regulations and similar laws had guaranteed good working conditions for generations. The argument for public unionization wasn't moral, economic or intellectual. It was rankly political.

Private sector unions fight with management over an equitable distribution of profits. Government unions negotiate with politicians over taxpayer money, putting the public interest at odds with union interests and, as we've seen in states such as California and Wisconsin, exploding the cost of government. The labor-politician negotiations can't be fair when the unions can put so much money into campaign spending.

This is why FDR believed that "the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service," and why even George Meany, the first head of the AFL-CIO, held that it was "impossible to bargain collectively with the government."

Banking Reform: More Equity, Less Government

From my article at the American.com (with Robert Dell),"More Equity, Less Government: Rethinking Bank Regulation":

History’s two most influential advocates for economic liberty, Adam Smith and Milton Friedman, nevertheless turned away from “free banking” to support some financial regulation and legislative reform in the wake of financial crises. Yet their proposed reforms would have limited government discretionary power and systemic micromanagement. What would they have concluded from the recent crisis and the policy responses embodied in the Dodd-Frank Act, which expands these powers without addressing the policy failures that largely produced the crisis?

Supporters of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act obviously believe expanded regulatory powers offer the best solution to reform, but they should consider that almost all previous major banking legislation has helped to create conditions that inevitably lead to the next banking crisis. A more market-based solution would be to simply regulate higher mandated equity standards in the range of 15 to 30 percent of total assets. In the tradition of Smith and Friedman, this approach would be a much more effective regulatory approach to curbing risk-taking, reducing systemic risk, and preventing a future banking crisis than 2,000 pages of Dodd-Frank.

Conversation and Perspective with Paul McCracken At 95 Yrs. Old, He Still Keeps Regular Office Hours

From a story and interview with Paul McCracken, from the Michigan Ross School of Business:

"Paul McCracken (pictured above at his 95th birthday party) arrived on the University of Michigan campus in 1948, and in 2011 he still keeps regular office hours. He is the Edmund Ezra Day Distinguished University Professor Emeritus of Business Administration, Economics, and Public Policy, and at age 95, he is one of the school’s most treasured resources." 

Here's an excerpt: 

You were chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under President Nixon, and you and the president had a disagreement over price controls. Despite some of his own reservations and your recommendation against them, he enacted them. How did that dynamic work? 

McCracken: Well, that kind of thing can happen. I thought price controls were a bad idea for a very simple reason. You couldn't look back into history and point to a success story. At the time, the president and Congress were involved in a battle in the political domain. Political battles are often more important to them than hard, solid data. 

Interesting Fact (not mentioned in the article): Paul McCracken was interim president of The American Enterprise Institute in 1986, and was succeeded by Chris DeMuth. 

Jobless Claims Fall to Lowest Level Since July 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- "In another sign that the job market is slowly recovering, the number of Americans filing first-time claims for unemployment benefits fell last week. There were 391,000 initial jobless claims filed in the week ended Feb. 19, according to the Labor Department said Thursday. That was down 22,000 from the week before, and better than the 410,000 claims economists surveyed by Briefing.com had expected. The 4-week moving average fell to 402,000 from 418,500 the previous week."

MP: The four-week moving average of 402,000 jobless claims is the lowest since July 2008, more than two and-a-half years ago (see chart above).  

Truck Tonnage Index Surges 3.8% in January; Trucking Activity Is Back to Pre-Recession Levels

"The American Trucking Associations’ seasonally adjusted For-Hire Truck Tonnage Index increased 3.8 percent in January after rising a revised 2.5 percent in December 2010. The latest jump put the SA index at 117.1 (2000=100) in January, which was the highest level since January 2008 (see chart above).  In December, the SA index equaled 112.7.  Compared with January 2010, SA tonnage climbed 8 percent, which was the largest year-over-year increase since April 2010. For all of 2010, tonnage was up 5.7 percent compared with 2009."

MP: Trucking activity in the U.S. has now returned to the pre-recession levels of late 2007-early 2008.   

Gas Prices in Europe, Japan and USA

From The Economist, an interactive chart on gas prices, click tabs to change:

Note: Gas in the Netherlands costs about $8 per gallon, and gas in the U.S. costs about half of the price in the next highest country - Bulgaria.

Now This Sure Seems Like a No-Brainer

"With the Texas state budget in crisis, is there anything beneficial the legislature can do that would not cost anything?  Yes, there sure is. Lawmakers can significantly improve access to health care and save their constituents money, at no cost to taxpayers.

All they have to do is add Texas to the list of 35 other states that allow advanced practice nurses to diagnose and prescribe without the oversight of doctors. The move would open the door to more retail health clinics in the state because clinic operators, such as the Walgreen Co. and CVS Caremark chains, no longer would have to pay a doctor a large fee to oversee each clinic."

Link.

Credit Card Delinquencies Fall to 2007 Level

The delinquency rate on credit cards at all commercial banks dropped for the sixth straight quarter to 4.17% during the October-December period last year, which is the lowest level since the second quarter of 2007 according to new data released by the Federal Reserve.  That's quite an improvement in credit card delinquencies over the last six quarters, especially when compared to the all-time high of 6.75% in the second quarter of 2009.  

Just one more sign of economic recovery and evidence that the worst is far behind us. 

As a Share of Income, Clothing and Footwear in U.S. Are More Affordable Today Than Ever Before

Americans spent almost $338.1 billion on clothing and footwear in 2010 (data here), which as a share of disposable personal income (data here), was the lowest ever in U.S. history, at only 2.97%. Spending on clothing as a share of income has fallen in 21 out of the last 23 years, from 4.78% in 1988 to less than 3% in both 2009 and 2010. Compared to 1950 when spending on clothing was 9% of income, spending last year was less than one-third that amount, and compared to spending on clothing of 6% of income in 1970, spending last year was half of that share.

In other words, clothing is now cheaper than at any time in history, when measured as a share of disposable income. And there's a better selection of clothing now, at higher quality, and with options available today like no-iron fabrics and washable silk that have become increasingly available in recent years. And when it comes to footwear, I don't think anybody would argue that the selection and quality today are far ahead of past decades - just think of the athletic footwear options today vs. Chuck Taylor Converse All-Stars, which were at one time "state-of-the-art" and were only available in two colors (black and white) until 1966. 

Bottom Line: As a direct result of increased global competition, advances in technology, and increased worker productivity, clothing is cheaper today both in inflation-adjusted prices and as a share of disposable income. We have more clothing today per person than any previous generation (think of the number and size of closets in a typical 1930s, 1940s or 1950s era home), and the clothing and footwear are cheaper and better than ever, contributing to an ever-increasing rising standard of living for the average American.

Two Dozen Bullish Charts: U.S. Economy is Strong

From Scott Grannis, who comments:  

"As we now face another source of concern with the political turmoil in the Middle East and rising oil prices, I thought it might be helpful to review those same charts plus a few others. As should be evident, the fundamentals of the U.S. economy remain strong, and this is good reason to expect that the economy will continue to push ahead in spite of the headwinds it faces."

Chart of the Day: Real Egg Prices, 1890-2011

The cost of wholesale eggs today (adjusted for inflation) is about 50% lower than during the 1970s, about 75% lower than during the 1940s and 1950s.   

Interesting Facts of the Day

1. Prime office space in Rio de Janeiro has overtaken that of New York for the first time as the most expensive in the Americas on the back of Brazil’s growing economy and strong currency. The cost of prime office rentals in downtown Rio shot up by 47% last year to $1,321 per square meter vs. $1,260 in midtown New York.

2. New research from the National Restaurant Association shows that nearly 50 percent of restaurants are now owned by women. 

3. Maine fishermen caught a record 93.4 million pounds of lobster in 2010 valued at more than $308 million. The Department of Marine Resources said the harvest of Maine's signature seafood broke the previous record of 81.2 million pounds, set in 2009.

As a Share of Income, Americans Have the Most Affordable Food in World & It's Never Been Better

Inspired by an item in today's "The Gartman Letter," the chart below displays data from the USDA comparing household spending on food as a share of final consumption expenditures for 84 countries around the world.  Dennis Gartman comments:

"Everyone knows that the price of food is rising fast, and nearly as many know that the price of rising food falls most harshly upon the poor. It is the poor in any country that have to use the greatest percentage of their disposable income to buy this most basic of all requirements for life. Full bellies, as they say, tend not to make revolutions and once this percentage gets upward of 35% bellies are less and less full and regime change more and more likely."

Share of Household Spending on Food, 2008	%
United States	6.9
Ireland	7.2
Singapore	8.0
United Arab Emirates	8.7
United Kingdom	8.8
Canada	9.1
Switzerland	10.2
Australia	10.5
Austria	11.1
Germany	11.4
Sweden	11.5
Denmark	11.5
Netherlands	11.5
Finland	11.9
New Zealand	12.1
Hong Kong, China	12.2
Qatar	12.7
Norway	12.9
Belgium	13.0
Spain	13.2
France	13.5
Greece	14.0
Malaysia	14.0
Japan	14.2
Italy	14.2
Kuwait	14.5
Bahrain	14.5
Estonia	14.6
Slovenia	15.0
South Korea	15.1
Portugal	15.6
Czech Republic	15.6
Hungary	16.3
Slovakia	16.6
Israel	17.7
Bulgaria	18.2
Uruguay	18.5
Ecuador	19.0
Latvia	19.0
South Africa	19.8
Argentina	20.3
Poland	20.3
Lithuania	21.8
Chile	23.3
Saudi Arabia	23.7
Mexico	24.0
Taiwan	24.0
Turkey	24.4
Brazil	24.7
Thailand	24.8
Costa Rica	25.7
Croatia	25.8
Iran	25.9
Turkmenistan	27.1
Colombia	27.6
Russia	28.0
Bolivia	28.2
Peru	29.0
Venezuela	29.1
Dominican Republic	29.2
Bosnia-Herzegovina	31.1
Macedonia	31.5
China	32.9
Romania	34.3
Kazakhstan	34.9
Uzbekistan	35.1
India	35.4
Guatemala	35.5
Tunisia	35.7
Philippines	36.7
Vietnam	38.1
Egypt	38.1
Cameroon	38.4
Nigeria	39.9
Morocco	40.4
Jordan	40.7
Georgia	40.7
Ukraine	42.1
Indonesia	43.0
Belarus	43.2
Algeria	43.8
Kenya	44.9
Pakistan	45.5
Azerbaijan	46.9
Source: USDA

MP: As much as Americans might complain about rising food prices in the U.S. (even though annual CPI food inflation hasn't been above 2% for almost two years), we've got the most affordable food on the planet as a share of income (see chart above).  And compared to previous years, today's Americans have the most affordable food in U.S. history (see chart below).

 

Intrade Introduces Inflation Futures Contracts

Inflation has been getting lots of attention lately.  For example, do a Google News search for terms like "rising inflation," "inflationary pressures" or "rising food prices" and you'll find almost 3,000 results each.  Interestingly, you'll get about the same number of results for the word "deflation."  

According to the most recent WSJ Economic Forecasting Survey, the consensus of more than 50 economists and analysts is that CPI inflation will be 2.1% in December 2011.  But with all of the talk lately about rising food and commodity prices, there are many guests on CNBC, Bloomberg, and FOX Business News who think the inflationary pressures will push the rate up much higher than 2.1% by the end of the year.  

With all of the incredible divergence of opinions about future inflation, it seemed natural for Intrade to introduce inflation futures contracts, and that's exactly what just happened following my suggestion to them.  Here's the link to the six new futures contracts that allow you to take a position on the U.S. inflation rate in December 2011, based on the 12-month percentage change in the CPI-U.  

Intrade Odds on Gaddafi Jump as He Flees

Intrade Odds for Muammar al-Gaddafi to no longer be leader of Libya by December 2011 just shot up to 79% (see chart above), as news reports are saying he is fleeing to Venezuela. 

Oregon Must Win the National Competition for Jobs

Imagine if Obama had delivered the revised speech below last week.  If it sounds silly to hear the president talking about Oregon "winning the national competition for new jobs and industries," that's because it is pretty silly.  But it's equally silly to talk about the county "winning the global competition for new jobs and industries," because it's based on flawed "zero-sum," "fixed pie" thinking, i.e. there's only a fixed number of jobs and for us to "win jobs," some other country has to "lose jobs."  Here it is:

Weekly Address: To Win the Future, America Oregon Must Win the Global National Competition in Education

PORTLAND – In this week’s address, President Obama said that the United States Oregon needs the best trained and best skilled workforce in the world country to win the global national competition for new jobs and industries.  

I’m speaking to you from just outside Portland, Oregon where I’m visiting Intel, a company that helped pioneer the digital age.  I just came from a tour of an assembly line where highly-skilled technicians are building microprocessors that run everything from desktop computers to smartphones.  But these workers aren’t just manufacturing high-tech computer chips.  They’re showing us how America Oregon will win the future.

For decades, Intel has led the world nation in developing new technologies.  But even as global national competition has intensified, this company has invested, built, and hired in America Oregon.  Three-quarters of Intel’s products are made by American Oregonian workers.  And as the company expands operations in Oregon and builds outsources a new plant in to Arizona, it plans to hire another 4,000 people this year.

Companies like Intel are proving that we Oregon can compete – that instead of just being a nation state that buys what’s made overseas in other states, we can make things in America Oregon and sell them around the globe country.  Winning this competition among the states depends on the ingenuity and creativity of our private sector in Oregon – which was on display in my visit today.  But it’s also going to depend on what we do as a nation state to make America Oregon the best place on earth in America to do business.

If we want to win the global national competition for new jobs and industries in Oregon, we’ve got to win the global national competition to educate our people in Oregon.  We’ve got to have the best trained, best skilled workforce in the world country. That’s how we’ll ensure that the next Intel, the next Google, or the next Microsoft is created in America Oregon and hires American Oregonian workers.

The truth is, we have everything we need to compete in Oregon: bold entrepreneurs, bright new ideas, and world-class colleges and universities.  And, most of all, we have young people in Oregon just brimming with promise and ready to help us Oregon succeed.  All we have Oregon has to do is tap that Oregonian potential. That’s the lesson on display at Intel.  And that’s how America Oregon will win the future.

Thank you.

Seattle Times Editorial Board Says "Legalize It"

"Prohibition has not worked. It might work in North Korea. But in America, prohibition is the pursuit of the impossible.  Marijuana should be legalized, regulated and taxed. The push to repeal federal prohibition should come from the states, and it should begin with the state of Washington."

Read more here. 

The TOTAL Volume of Trade is Most Important

From Cato's Dan Griswold post "Rising Exports—and Imports—Are Good News for U.S. Economy":

"Politicians and commentators love to focus on the deficit, as though it were a scorecard of who is winning in global trade, but the real measure is the total volume of trade. As economies expand, so does trade, both imports and exports. Exports help us reach new markets and expand economies of scale, while imports bless consumers with lower prices and more choices, while stoking competition, innovation, and efficiency gains among producers.

By this measure the BEA's recent trade report for December was good news all around, and one more sign that the U.S. and global economies continue to recover from the Great Recession. Last year, U.S. exports of goods were up 21 percent from 2009, while imports were up 23 percent. In contrast, in the recession year of 2009, exports of goods dropped 18 percent from the year before while imports plunged 26 percent. (Unemployment soared in 2009, but, hey, at least the trade deficit was “improving”!)"

MP: I've made this point before about the importance of adding exports and imports to report total trade, see posts here and here.  As the top chart above illustrates, total trade plummeted by $120 billion due to the global recession from mid-2008 through the summer of 2009, and this was at a time when our monthly trade deficits were "improving," from almost -$70 billion to less than -$30 billion.  Obviously, the declining volume of total trade in 2008-2009 was a much better indicator of the deteriorating economic conditions than the "improving trade deficit."

As Dan points out, when it comes to measuring economic performance of the U.S. economy, the most meaningful and relevant measure is "total trade" and not the relatively meaningless current account "trade deficit" for goods and services (which is exactly offset by a capital account surplus).   It's unfortunate that the total volume of international trade doesn't get more attention.  Thanks for Dan Griswold for making the case. 

Mackinac Center Exposes Hypocrisy and Waste

1. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy discovers that the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters uses non-union labor to protest a Grand Rapids area businessman. What's worse, the union has even recruited demonstrators who frequent local homeless shelters, including a shelter which gets help from the very same businessman targeted by the union (see video).  (HT: Newsalert)

2.The University of California at Berkeley, facing a new round of state budget cuts this year, announced in January that it will eliminate 280 positions, 150 of them through layoffs and the rest through retirements or other means.

But at the same time the university was laying off hundreds of employees due to budget cuts, it was able to come up with $300,000 to hire former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and her husband to teach two classes each at UC-Berkeley in 2011, according to documents released by the school to the Mackinac Center through a Freedom of Information Act request. In the offer letter to the couple, they were informed that "University policies will permit you to devote substantial time to outside consulting or other compensated activity, as well as your summers.”

Three Charts Tell The Story

1. Chart 1: As "payments to individuals" becomes a greater and greater share of the federal budget...... see chart above

2. Chart 2: The percent of taxpayers with zero or negative tax liability goes up....  see chart below....

3. Chart 3: And the share of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers goes up and the share of taxes paid by the bottom 95% goes down...  see chart above...

As John Merline points out in his excellent editorial:

"When you put these two trends together, what you find is that the federal government has over the years essentially turned into a gigantic wealth-transfer machine -- taking money from a shrinking pool of taxpayers and giving it out to a growing list of favored groups."