"In Fact"

Don't you find it annoying when people write "in fact" as a way to assert something without providing actual evidence. One of the reasons people do this (here I can speak from experience) is because that asserted fact is not a fact at all, but merely an assertion we wish to be true.

Example.

In a recent blog entry, Krugman writes

Even people who are supposedly well informed believe that there was a vast expansion of government under Obama, when in fact there wasn’t. (emphasis added)

OK, here are the actual facts obtained from the Office of Management and Budget historical tables. In 2008, total government outlays were 2.98 trillion. The 2011 estimate is 3.83 trillion. As a percentage of GDP, federal government outlays rose from 20.7% to 25.1%.

So unless we want to redefine "expansion", "government" or "under Obama", we have to accept that there was in fact an
"expansion of government under Obama." But was it vast? To me, almost a trillion dollars (28.5% increase) over 5 years is on the big side of things, especially when considering that outlays had been at 21% or below as a share of GDP since 1994.

OK, that is the end of the "Republican" portion of this post. Now we have to point out that the increases in government outlays have come in large part from increases in military spending, pensions, and medicare (medical care for the elderly). Spending is not just foreign aid and "bridges to nowhere". In fact that sort thing is very small.

And while government has indeed expanded, it is equally evident that tax receipts have been shrinking as a share of GDP.

Bees and Blueberries

While at the Kitsilano Farmer's Market, I saw a sign for honey made from the blueberries at G- farms. I asked the honeymaker if he has to pay for his bees to have access to the farm. He said actually they pay him for bringing his bees to their farm.

Why can't the farms rely on wild bees to do the pollination? Well in the Frasier valley, the only wild bees are bumble bees which hibernate in the winter in mouseholes. With the cool spring, the bumble bees were late in getting started. I asked if he could charge extra because of the added need for his bees. Unfortunately for him, prices for pollination services fell this summer due to the arrival of a new competitor from Northern Alberta (of all places!). Where the old established price was $95 (per field? acre? I didn't catch that), this guy went to a farm show and announced his willingness to accept $65.

The newcomer has 20,000 colonies in semis and decided to come to the Frasier valley to nourish his bees here before taking them to the Canola fields of the prairies for the summer. The farmer I spoke to still is able to charge over $65 to some local farms ($75 to G- farm) because of the established relationship which means the farmer can rely upon him to come each year. But the old $95 prices are unattainable.

I bought 250ml of blueberry honey for $4.95. Not only am I looking forward to enjoying it on French Toast, I may use it as a prop for my next lecture on externalities...since now I have my own anecdote to add to the "fable of the bees." (Journal of Law and Economics, 1973, "The Fable of the Bees: An Economic Investigation" by Steven Cheung)