France's Burqa ban goes into effect.

[Brett327]

The metrics used to measure the economy show that it is in an improved state since two years ago, that is true. However, I would not put much weight into those metrics nor into those "10 PhDs whose job it is to study such things" given the track records of each. A certain few economic PhDs, yes I would listen to, but absolutely not a random set of 10 economists. "Surprise" housing bubble, anyone? I wonder what the next "surprise" or "perfect storm" of bad economic conditions will be, and for that I turn to economists with demonstrable success in economic analysis, not those who have simply a PhD and talk Keynesianism all day.

Of course, there is also the matter of how the statistics are counted and how the metrics are used. Here's a good test to see if the CPI metric is any good: do you feel that the rate of "inflation" is high or low/negative?

I think you're taking the metaphor a little to literally.

Brett

 

[Sapper!]

The metrics used to measure the economy show that it is in an improved state since two years ago, that is true. However, I would not put much weight into those metrics nor into those "10 PhDs whose job it is to study such things" given the track records of each. A certain few economic PhDs, yes I would listen to, but absolutely not a random set of 10 economists. "Surprise" housing bubble, anyone? I wonder what the next "surprise" or "perfect storm" of bad economic conditions will be, and for that I turn to economists with demonstrable success in economic analysis, not those who have simply a PhD and talk Keynesianism all day.

Of course, there is also the matter of how the statistics are counted and how the metrics are used. Here's a good test to see if the CPI metric is any good: do you feel that the rate of "inflation" is high or low/negative?

My thoughts exactly...CPI is showing annualized inflation of 10-20 throughout all areas. Economists are screaming that things are improving and then revising their numbers down 30-60 days after they are posted. Household employment is still on the decline as it has been, the housing market is set to lose another 5-7 trillion. Not sure why people are saying there has been a bounce back. The stock market is a terrible indicator because while the stocks grew 50%, the P/I didn't budge. That means that the companies have no growth in REAL assets (so their stock prices are junk) which is evident as they all sit on their borrowed assets praying that things turn around so the insolvency problems are covered up. Meanwhile banks have been sitting on properties that should have been forclosed years ago to hide the same issues. Corporations are issuing junk bonds like crazy and no GM did not pay back their equity loan, which is much bigger than the bailout loan.

So the big problem here is that while we are saying it is getting better we need to remember that we borrowed over 4%(the stimulus) of our GDP and organic growth was what <2.9%...that means that we just propped our economy up on borrowed money. Which is what we have been doing for the past 30 years. It's all a wash we didn't grow we just prolonged the inevitable. Meanwhile those CDOs are still be traded and default credit swaps happening like crazy. No regulation is taking place, we are gonna go back to the crapper, better put some cash under the mattress like grandma and grandpa did.

By the way...the Fed (the board of economists!) says we have "the deflation", I'm not buying it.

 

[BusyBee604]

So you're suggesting that the anecdotal experiences of 10 laymen lend superior insight into the economy than 10 PhDs whose job it is to study such things. Roger.

That's exactly what I am saying, not suggesting!

You're right, not much room for debate, just a waste of valuable time.
BzB

 

[statesman]

Hercdriver, perhaps the French simply think that burqa's are not compatible with their culture. If they want to ban them then why shouldn't they? Why should foreigners expect a strange country to accommodate them?

Fair enough this is a French issue, and I can accommodate that to a certain extent.

But then how do you feel about state censorship in other countries (China, N. Korea, etc)?

And for the sake of argument what if the French enacted laws allowing slavery?

Are those all French / Chineese issues? Or do we have a responsibility to be vocal about our disapproval of those policies?

 

[Brett327]

Fair enough this is a French issue, and I can accommodate that to a certain extent.

But then how do you feel about state censorship in other countries (China, N. Korea, etc)?

And for the sake of argument what if the French enacted laws allowing slavery?

Are those all French / Chineese issues? Or do we have a responsibility to be vocal about our disapproval of those policies?

In my view, the counter to the "The French can do what they want" argument is that the French claim to espouse, in rhetoric and in their various "republican" founding documents, the principles of freedom of speech and expression. It is worth noting the Thomas Jefferson was, in effect, a consultant in the French post-revolutionary period, and while the rights of French citizens are spelled out in a much less explicit form and have undergone myriad changes over their various "Republics," I think it's fair to say that when viewed in the proper context, the French philosophy on individual rights is akin to our own. The problem is that French law has historically given deference to elected lawmakers over their judiciary, which weakens the ability of citizens to make challenges.

Brett

 

[wtrresq2011]

Sorry I can't read all the posts - so if someone said this already I apologize for boring all of you - the important part of the law is that it targets those who are forcing women to cover their faces. I can see a scenario kind of like in the U.S. where abusive parents are reported to authorities and punished, that parents who force their females to cover get in trouble. It seems more like an attempt at guaranteeing women's rights than stopping religious expression. Basically, the law targets Muslim men, probably many of the same young Muslim men who hate the West, especially the good ole' US of A. Maybe France is on to something. In their usual French way, they have to go at the issue indirectly. We Americans on the other hand prefer to be a little more direct using military force! We could look at the French law as an experiment in Civil Rights Law to protect Muslim women from being forced to cover themselves when they might prefer not to do so if they actually had someone protecting them from their own families.