http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/the-trade-off-between-economic-growth-and-deficit-reduction/?ref=business
***************
"No leader, however great, can long continue unless he wins victories" (Bernard Law Montgomery)
***************
Laura Tyson is a professor at the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley, and served as chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisers during President Bill Clinton's administration.
Her perspective on this "recovery" from the deepest recession since the Great Depression is that the "pace" is frustratingly slow. Since 2010, annual growth of gross domestic product has averaged about 2.1%. This is less than half the pace of previous recoveries since WW II.
Tyson points out that most economists see weak aggregate demand as the primary reason for this weak GDP growth. Growth in the two components of private demand - consumption and residential investment - has been especially slow.
Residential investment is still depressed as a result of overbuilding during the 2004-2008 housing boom. Business investment has been slow because of lackluster customer demand and weak sales prospects.
So, the cutbacks to spending into the economy implied by doing nothing about the "fiscal cliff" (ie. letting it happen) would have large negative effects on demand, output and employment. There would be 3.4 million fewer jobs by the end of 2013 if Congress allows the "fiscal cliff" to happen.
So, Tyson is another voice, along with Krugman and Buffet, for spending into a weak recovery or we could just watch a recession return.
According to the Dallas Fed's forecast released yesterday, Texas job growth will continue in 2013 but at a slightly slower pace than for this year. According to the report, "Energy, exports and construction have driven Texas employment above its pre-recession level in 2012..." but that employment has slowed lately. Low natural gas prices have led to a decline in well permits and drilling.
The weak global economy has hurt Texas exports to China and the European Union. But Texas construction jobs lead the U.S. in growth: 46,900 jobs in the 12 months thru October. Last month, existing home sales were up 29% FROM A YEAR EARLIER! That can only be good news - no qualifiers.
What looms large in the background here is big business which has been sitting on (by various measures) at least $2 trillion in cash since 2010. CEOs that have been interviewed by those with "access" have continuously said that they're reluctant to invest in the U.S. because of the uncertain economic environment. That involves regulation, taxation and various combinations thereof.
Let's see what happens when the smoke clears.
Merry XMAS and Happy Holidays!
Friday, December 14, 2012
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Skills That Don't Pay the Bills II
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/07/comparing-recessions-and-recoveries-2/
***************
"Where success is concerned, people are not measured in inches, or pounds, or college degrees, or family background; they are measured by the size of their thinking." (David Schwartz)
***************
One of the guest commentators at yesterday's "DealBook" (NY Times) business conference in Manhattan was Paul Krugman. I'm always interested in what he has to say so I listened in. Aside from the usual issues about the "fiscal cliff," China, etc., Krugman mentioned Adam Davidson's commentary in the New York Times Magazine on the hue and cry about "skilled jobs."
As I quoted Davidson in my prior post:
"Deep Thoughts"
(1) There is no skills gap.
(2) Who wants to operate a highly sophisticated machine for $10 per hour?
(3) Not a lot of people.
(4) As a result, there is going to be a skills gap.
Krugman's point was that, of course, there's going to be a "skills gap" if you're going to pay $10 per hour for skilled people. Krugman pointed out yesterday, as he did in his column last week, that "...there is a whole industry built around the promotion of deficit panic. Lavishly funded corporate groups keep hyping the danger of government debt and the urgency of deficit reduction now now now - except that these same groups are suddenly warning against too much deficit reduction. No wonder the public is confused."
Krugman is much more concerned about "mass unemployment." While he accepts that there has been some progress on this issue over the past year, he points out that long-term unemployment remains at levels not see since the Great Depression: "...as of October, 4.9 million Americans had been unemployed for more than six months, and 3.6 million had been out of work for more than a year."
I keep track of the overall unemployment picture by following Catherine Rampell's recession trend lines (see her post attached): Job Changes in Recent Recessions/Recoveries, as a Share of Employment at Previous Peak. That's a long title but a picture is worth a thousand words as the old saying says. Her color trend lines depicting the 5 previous recessions/recoveries versus the recession that initiated in 2007 make it easy to see where we "aren't." As she points out, for the 26th straight month, the country has added jobs: 146,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in November but employment still has a long way to go before returning to pre-recession levels: "Getting the economy to 5% unemployment within two years - a return to the rate that prevailed when the recession began - would require job growth of closer to 270,000 per month."
Rampell goes on to point out: "There are now 12 million workers looking for work who cannot find it. The tally of those who are "underemployed" - that is, adding in those workers who are part time but want to be employed full time, and workers who want to work but are not looking - is an even larger 22.7 million."
While Rampell's 2007-present trend line is headed back up toward where it started, if you project the "slope" of it, just by "eye," (and, of course, I'm going off her chart) my guess is that it doesn't return to its start point until 2014 to 2017.
Maybe this is one of the reasons why the Fed has announced that it plans to hold short-term interest rates near zero as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6.5%.
***************
"Where success is concerned, people are not measured in inches, or pounds, or college degrees, or family background; they are measured by the size of their thinking." (David Schwartz)
***************
One of the guest commentators at yesterday's "DealBook" (NY Times) business conference in Manhattan was Paul Krugman. I'm always interested in what he has to say so I listened in. Aside from the usual issues about the "fiscal cliff," China, etc., Krugman mentioned Adam Davidson's commentary in the New York Times Magazine on the hue and cry about "skilled jobs."
As I quoted Davidson in my prior post:
"Deep Thoughts"
(1) There is no skills gap.
(2) Who wants to operate a highly sophisticated machine for $10 per hour?
(3) Not a lot of people.
(4) As a result, there is going to be a skills gap.
Krugman's point was that, of course, there's going to be a "skills gap" if you're going to pay $10 per hour for skilled people. Krugman pointed out yesterday, as he did in his column last week, that "...there is a whole industry built around the promotion of deficit panic. Lavishly funded corporate groups keep hyping the danger of government debt and the urgency of deficit reduction now now now - except that these same groups are suddenly warning against too much deficit reduction. No wonder the public is confused."
Krugman is much more concerned about "mass unemployment." While he accepts that there has been some progress on this issue over the past year, he points out that long-term unemployment remains at levels not see since the Great Depression: "...as of October, 4.9 million Americans had been unemployed for more than six months, and 3.6 million had been out of work for more than a year."
I keep track of the overall unemployment picture by following Catherine Rampell's recession trend lines (see her post attached): Job Changes in Recent Recessions/Recoveries, as a Share of Employment at Previous Peak. That's a long title but a picture is worth a thousand words as the old saying says. Her color trend lines depicting the 5 previous recessions/recoveries versus the recession that initiated in 2007 make it easy to see where we "aren't." As she points out, for the 26th straight month, the country has added jobs: 146,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in November but employment still has a long way to go before returning to pre-recession levels: "Getting the economy to 5% unemployment within two years - a return to the rate that prevailed when the recession began - would require job growth of closer to 270,000 per month."
Rampell goes on to point out: "There are now 12 million workers looking for work who cannot find it. The tally of those who are "underemployed" - that is, adding in those workers who are part time but want to be employed full time, and workers who want to work but are not looking - is an even larger 22.7 million."
While Rampell's 2007-present trend line is headed back up toward where it started, if you project the "slope" of it, just by "eye," (and, of course, I'm going off her chart) my guess is that it doesn't return to its start point until 2014 to 2017.
Maybe this is one of the reasons why the Fed has announced that it plans to hold short-term interest rates near zero as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6.5%.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Skills Don't Pay the Bills
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/magazine/skills-dont-pay-the-bills.html?pagewanted=all
***************
"Bottom line thinking makes it possible for you to measure outcomes more quickly and easily." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
Adam Davidson's "Deep Thoughts This Week:"
1. There is no skills gap.
2. Who wants to operate a highly sophisticated machine for $10 an hour?
3. Not a lot of people.
4. As a result, there is going to be a skills gap.
Nearly 6 million factory jobs, almost a third of the entire manufacturing industry, have disappeared since 2000. And, while many of these jobs were lost to competition with low-wage countries, even more vanished because of computer-driven machinery that can do the work of 10, or in some cases, 100 workers. Those jobs are not coming back, but many believe that the industry's future (and, to some extent, the future of the American economy) lies in training a new generation for highly skilled manufacturing jobs -- the ones that require people who know how to run the computer that runs the machine.
According to Adam Davidson, the secret behind the skills gap is that there is not a skills gap at all. In a recent study by the Boston Consulting Group: "...outside of a few small cities that rely on the oil industry, there weren't many places where manufacturing wages were going up and employers still couldn't find enough workers. Trying to hire high-skilled workers at rock-bottom rates is not a skills gap." (starting pay at a metal fabricating manufacturer: $10 per hour; starting pay as a shift manager at McDonald's: $14 per hour.). "Many skilled workers have simply chosen to apply their skills elsewhere rather than work for less, and few young people choose to invest in training for jobs that pay fast food wages."
So, manufacturers, who face increasing competition from low-wage countries, feel they can't afford to pay higher wages. Potential workers choose more promising career paths. According to Howard Wial, an economist at the Brookings Institution who specializes in manufacturing employment: "It's individually rational. But it's not socially optimal."
If that isn't bad enough, it's hard to train people who are willing to learn these manufacturing skills (even at low pay rates) when they graduate from high school without the basic skills in math and science that these companies need to compete.
So: "The so-called skills gap is really a gap in education, and that effects all of us." (Adam Davidson)
***************
"Bottom line thinking makes it possible for you to measure outcomes more quickly and easily." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
Adam Davidson's "Deep Thoughts This Week:"
1. There is no skills gap.
2. Who wants to operate a highly sophisticated machine for $10 an hour?
3. Not a lot of people.
4. As a result, there is going to be a skills gap.
Nearly 6 million factory jobs, almost a third of the entire manufacturing industry, have disappeared since 2000. And, while many of these jobs were lost to competition with low-wage countries, even more vanished because of computer-driven machinery that can do the work of 10, or in some cases, 100 workers. Those jobs are not coming back, but many believe that the industry's future (and, to some extent, the future of the American economy) lies in training a new generation for highly skilled manufacturing jobs -- the ones that require people who know how to run the computer that runs the machine.
According to Adam Davidson, the secret behind the skills gap is that there is not a skills gap at all. In a recent study by the Boston Consulting Group: "...outside of a few small cities that rely on the oil industry, there weren't many places where manufacturing wages were going up and employers still couldn't find enough workers. Trying to hire high-skilled workers at rock-bottom rates is not a skills gap." (starting pay at a metal fabricating manufacturer: $10 per hour; starting pay as a shift manager at McDonald's: $14 per hour.). "Many skilled workers have simply chosen to apply their skills elsewhere rather than work for less, and few young people choose to invest in training for jobs that pay fast food wages."
So, manufacturers, who face increasing competition from low-wage countries, feel they can't afford to pay higher wages. Potential workers choose more promising career paths. According to Howard Wial, an economist at the Brookings Institution who specializes in manufacturing employment: "It's individually rational. But it's not socially optimal."
If that isn't bad enough, it's hard to train people who are willing to learn these manufacturing skills (even at low pay rates) when they graduate from high school without the basic skills in math and science that these companies need to compete.
So: "The so-called skills gap is really a gap in education, and that effects all of us." (Adam Davidson)
How the Tax Burden Has Changed
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/us/most-americans-face-lower-tax-burden-than-in-the-80s.html?adxnnl=1&emc=eta1&adxnnlx=1354303994-qkpQ9uKXVj2vzfYK5Otlfg
***************
"Think of the bottom line as the end, the takeaway, the desired result." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
With some of the best graphics I've seen, the Times has come up with a set of charts picturing how the our taxes have changed over the years. All of this relates to the current negotiations going on about the "fiscal cliff."
According to the charts, most Americans paid less in taxes in 2010 than people with the same inflation-adjusted incomes did in 1980, because of cuts in federal income taxes. At lower income levels, however, much of the savings was offset by increases in federal payroll taxes, state sales taxes and local property taxes. About half the households making less than $25,000 saved nothing at all.
Now that we may be reaching the end of an era of tax cuts, what's next? The "mortgage interest expense" deduction is on the table. That will alienate everybody that owns a house.
Spending by federal, state and local governments makes up a growing share of U.S. economic activity. While state and local taxes have increased, federal revenues have declined to the lowest level in decades. This results in annual deficits and increasing long term debt. And then, we wonder why we have problems.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
***************
"Think of the bottom line as the end, the takeaway, the desired result." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
With some of the best graphics I've seen, the Times has come up with a set of charts picturing how the our taxes have changed over the years. All of this relates to the current negotiations going on about the "fiscal cliff."
According to the charts, most Americans paid less in taxes in 2010 than people with the same inflation-adjusted incomes did in 1980, because of cuts in federal income taxes. At lower income levels, however, much of the savings was offset by increases in federal payroll taxes, state sales taxes and local property taxes. About half the households making less than $25,000 saved nothing at all.
Now that we may be reaching the end of an era of tax cuts, what's next? The "mortgage interest expense" deduction is on the table. That will alienate everybody that owns a house.
Spending by federal, state and local governments makes up a growing share of U.S. economic activity. While state and local taxes have increased, federal revenues have declined to the lowest level in decades. This results in annual deficits and increasing long term debt. And then, we wonder why we have problems.
It will be interesting to see what happens.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
HP and the Big Four
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/business/auditors-clash-in-hp-deal-for-autonomy.html?ref=business
***************
"Learn, earn, return -- these are the three phases of life." (Jack Belousek)
***************
So HP is crying "foul" because they spent big money on a company that had been "audited" before they bought it. Where were the auditors? Well, according to Floyd Norris, they were everywhere: "They were consulting. They were advising ... on strategies for optimizing revenue. They were investigating whether books were cooked, and they were signing off on audits approving the books that are now alleged to have been cooked. They were offering advice on executive pay. There are four major accounting firms, and each has some involvement."
The Autonomy dispute (and HP's $8.8 billion write-down of that "asset") breaks down into:
* HP buys Autonomy for $11 billion in October, 2011;
* Last week, HP says Autonomy has been cooking the books in a variety of ways;
* Autonomy was audited by the British arm of Deloitte. HP, which is audited by Ernst &
Young, hired KPMG to perform due diligence in connection with the acquisition.
* That's three of the big four. So, it should be no surprise that PricewaterhouseCoopers
was brought in to do a forensic investigation because of a "whistle-blower." And,
PWC found bad things.
So, unless Floyd Norris has it wrong, that makes the Big Four tally two for Autonomy and two for HP. For me, if that is the case, why do we have Sarbanes and why do we have international accounting principles? And, what do the "Big Four" do?
I like the Floyd Norris perspective: "To an outsider, making sense of the brouhaha is not easy. In a normal accounting scandal, if there is such a thing, the company restates its earnings and details how revenue was inflated or costs hidden. That has not happened here and may never happen ..." HP took an $8.8 billion write-off for a company that never earned more than $1 billion in a year. The write-off represents much of the good will that HP booked when it made the deal. In other words, HP paid way too much and should have known better.
So what we have here is: "Two of the Big Four were fooled, at least according to the other two. Perhaps coincidentally, the firms tended to reach conclusions desired by those who paid them."
I could go on but the "Big Four" don't look so big right now and I'll leave it at that.
***************
"Learn, earn, return -- these are the three phases of life." (Jack Belousek)
***************
So HP is crying "foul" because they spent big money on a company that had been "audited" before they bought it. Where were the auditors? Well, according to Floyd Norris, they were everywhere: "They were consulting. They were advising ... on strategies for optimizing revenue. They were investigating whether books were cooked, and they were signing off on audits approving the books that are now alleged to have been cooked. They were offering advice on executive pay. There are four major accounting firms, and each has some involvement."
The Autonomy dispute (and HP's $8.8 billion write-down of that "asset") breaks down into:
* HP buys Autonomy for $11 billion in October, 2011;
* Last week, HP says Autonomy has been cooking the books in a variety of ways;
* Autonomy was audited by the British arm of Deloitte. HP, which is audited by Ernst &
Young, hired KPMG to perform due diligence in connection with the acquisition.
* That's three of the big four. So, it should be no surprise that PricewaterhouseCoopers
was brought in to do a forensic investigation because of a "whistle-blower." And,
PWC found bad things.
So, unless Floyd Norris has it wrong, that makes the Big Four tally two for Autonomy and two for HP. For me, if that is the case, why do we have Sarbanes and why do we have international accounting principles? And, what do the "Big Four" do?
I like the Floyd Norris perspective: "To an outsider, making sense of the brouhaha is not easy. In a normal accounting scandal, if there is such a thing, the company restates its earnings and details how revenue was inflated or costs hidden. That has not happened here and may never happen ..." HP took an $8.8 billion write-off for a company that never earned more than $1 billion in a year. The write-off represents much of the good will that HP booked when it made the deal. In other words, HP paid way too much and should have known better.
So what we have here is: "Two of the Big Four were fooled, at least according to the other two. Perhaps coincidentally, the firms tended to reach conclusions desired by those who paid them."
I could go on but the "Big Four" don't look so big right now and I'll leave it at that.
Third Quarter GDP Growth Revised
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/30/business/economy/third-quarter-gdp-growth-is-revised-up-to-2-7.html?hp
***************
"The person with a plan, a picture, will go after thoughts that add value to their thinking." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
After initially saying output increased at an annual rate of 2%, the Commerce Department revised its estimate to show growth at 2.7% in the three months ended September 30.
Consumer spending is up and housing is coming back in several regions. This is good news and I don't want to put a damper on it by pointing out that several prominent economists have predicted 1% or flat GDP growth for the fourth quarter if nothing is done about the "fiscal cliff." Frankly, some have predicted a direct correlation between the fiscal cliff and another U.S. recession. "Dr. Doom" (Nouriel Roubini, economist and rock star) has consistently predicted over several quarters that GDP growth is at "stall speed."
Warren Buffet was on the "Today" show this week and indicated that he thinks the economy is coming back. He also said his companies will be spending $9 billion in capital on plant and equipment in the coming year or years. That was his answer to the "fiscal cliff" issue.
According to the Federal Reserve's Beige Book Survey released Wednesday, growth improved in 9 of the Fed's 12 regional banking districts. Growth was weaker in New York, Philadelphia and Boston - not unexpected based on the problems Sandy caused. The Fed noted that growth was better despite nervousness about the fiscal cliff.
The Fed's Beige Book covers economic conditions around the U.S. from October thru November 14th and will be used for the Fed's December 11-12 meeting. In the Fed's Dallas region, the economy expanded modestly, with reports on manufacturing and transportation services mixed. Auto sales were flat. Home sales and construction increased and energy production continued to be strong.
Here's a quote from Robert Williams who is a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center: "If we go over the fiscal cliff, revenues will rise, even though the economy will likely fall back into recession. If President Obama and Congress reach a compromise, taxes will likely rise less. In either case, the government will need more revenue to balance its budget."
In spite of Warren Buffet's confidence, the pent up capital spending in Top 500 companies is still there. Once the fiscal cliff issue is resolved, let's see what happens with pent up capital.
***************
"The person with a plan, a picture, will go after thoughts that add value to their thinking." (John C. Maxwell)
***************
After initially saying output increased at an annual rate of 2%, the Commerce Department revised its estimate to show growth at 2.7% in the three months ended September 30.
Consumer spending is up and housing is coming back in several regions. This is good news and I don't want to put a damper on it by pointing out that several prominent economists have predicted 1% or flat GDP growth for the fourth quarter if nothing is done about the "fiscal cliff." Frankly, some have predicted a direct correlation between the fiscal cliff and another U.S. recession. "Dr. Doom" (Nouriel Roubini, economist and rock star) has consistently predicted over several quarters that GDP growth is at "stall speed."
Warren Buffet was on the "Today" show this week and indicated that he thinks the economy is coming back. He also said his companies will be spending $9 billion in capital on plant and equipment in the coming year or years. That was his answer to the "fiscal cliff" issue.
According to the Federal Reserve's Beige Book Survey released Wednesday, growth improved in 9 of the Fed's 12 regional banking districts. Growth was weaker in New York, Philadelphia and Boston - not unexpected based on the problems Sandy caused. The Fed noted that growth was better despite nervousness about the fiscal cliff.
The Fed's Beige Book covers economic conditions around the U.S. from October thru November 14th and will be used for the Fed's December 11-12 meeting. In the Fed's Dallas region, the economy expanded modestly, with reports on manufacturing and transportation services mixed. Auto sales were flat. Home sales and construction increased and energy production continued to be strong.
Here's a quote from Robert Williams who is a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center: "If we go over the fiscal cliff, revenues will rise, even though the economy will likely fall back into recession. If President Obama and Congress reach a compromise, taxes will likely rise less. In either case, the government will need more revenue to balance its budget."
In spite of Warren Buffet's confidence, the pent up capital spending in Top 500 companies is still there. Once the fiscal cliff issue is resolved, let's see what happens with pent up capital.
Friday, November 9, 2012
So, What Do We Do Now?
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=3111#.UJ1veStQ1MQ.email
***************
"Most people spend more time planning their summer vacation than planning their lives." (Source Unknown - John C. Maxwell)
***************
While I'm not sure what the economy is doing (and, I don't think anybody else is either), it looks like "housing" is finally beginning to move up. For me, that's one of the two indicators I look at (the other is "employment").
So, what should President Obama push for over the next 4 years? Well, it's nice to have a Wharton faculty summary of what they think he ought to be doing. According to Franklin Allen, the first thing he needs to do is solve the "fiscal cliff" problem. That would appear to be what President Obama is doing. According to Allen, the second thing he needs to be doing is reform Medicare. I don't see lots of people clamoring for that one.
Another voice of the Wharton faculty argues that the top priority should be getting the economy going again - Robert P. Inman, professor of business economics and public policy. He favors another round of fiscal stimulus (probably because the first round wasn't enough): his method would be broad-based tax cuts.
There is a general consensus that if the fiscal cliff problem is not solved, the overall economy will go back into recession. That would be as opposed to what it's in now - something Nouriel Roubini calls "stall speed."
Another faculty member sees the fiscal cliff crisis as long term opportunity to reform the tax code and spend a little smarter. Not bad. The problem is, as I told somebody recently, we are becoming Italy: members of Congress can't agree on what time it is. Or, as one member of the Wharton faculty puts it: "You used to have grown ups in the Senate...The grown ups just aren't there anymore. It's becoming so fragmented."
Susan Wachter, a Wharton real estate professor, feels the fragile housing market could falter without a fiscal cliff solution. This, just as that housing market appears to be coming back! Wachter defines "weak" as construction starts at 600,000 which is well below the 1.6 million peak before the recession.
There are so many considerations but it's interesting to see what one faculty thinks about an immediate need to do "something!"
***************
"Most people spend more time planning their summer vacation than planning their lives." (Source Unknown - John C. Maxwell)
***************
While I'm not sure what the economy is doing (and, I don't think anybody else is either), it looks like "housing" is finally beginning to move up. For me, that's one of the two indicators I look at (the other is "employment").
So, what should President Obama push for over the next 4 years? Well, it's nice to have a Wharton faculty summary of what they think he ought to be doing. According to Franklin Allen, the first thing he needs to do is solve the "fiscal cliff" problem. That would appear to be what President Obama is doing. According to Allen, the second thing he needs to be doing is reform Medicare. I don't see lots of people clamoring for that one.
Another voice of the Wharton faculty argues that the top priority should be getting the economy going again - Robert P. Inman, professor of business economics and public policy. He favors another round of fiscal stimulus (probably because the first round wasn't enough): his method would be broad-based tax cuts.
There is a general consensus that if the fiscal cliff problem is not solved, the overall economy will go back into recession. That would be as opposed to what it's in now - something Nouriel Roubini calls "stall speed."
Another faculty member sees the fiscal cliff crisis as long term opportunity to reform the tax code and spend a little smarter. Not bad. The problem is, as I told somebody recently, we are becoming Italy: members of Congress can't agree on what time it is. Or, as one member of the Wharton faculty puts it: "You used to have grown ups in the Senate...The grown ups just aren't there anymore. It's becoming so fragmented."
Susan Wachter, a Wharton real estate professor, feels the fragile housing market could falter without a fiscal cliff solution. This, just as that housing market appears to be coming back! Wachter defines "weak" as construction starts at 600,000 which is well below the 1.6 million peak before the recession.
There are so many considerations but it's interesting to see what one faculty thinks about an immediate need to do "something!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)