Archive for September, 2009

A new Gallup poll shows that Americans, when asked to estimate government waste, give a mean answer of 50 cents for every dollar. This is up 25 percent from 1970, when Americans thought the federal government wasted a “mere” 40 cents of every dollar. If you think about it, this answer suggests a profound cynicism about Washington DC. It’s also an expensive cynicism (Stephen Moore, in the Wall Street Journal, calculates that this means we believe the US government is wasting a solid $2 trillion annually).

Obviously, the main way the federal government raises this money is through taxes. So, given that the average American believes Uncle Sam is wasting half the money we send in, why has lower taxes not been a winning issue for Republicans of late?

The first reason, it seems to me, is that Republicans aren’t pushing this message particularly hard. Plenty of Republican politicians get plenty of benefit from this waste (see the Alaskan Bridge to Nowhere phenomenon), and plenty others prefer to beat the drums of God, military, apple pie, morals, senior citizen death panels, etc. These aren’t really fiscal issues, per se.

Second, an increasingly high proportion of Americans do not pay much in taxes, personally. Indeed, the increased use of refundable tax credits has made the tax burden for many middle income families fairly small. These families include the Joe Six Pack types that Republicans are now trying to court. While we fully know that government wastes money, as long as it’s someone else’s money, that’s not so big a problem, especially if you believe the “someone else” is some moneyed fat cat spending $1.2 million to upgrade his Wall Street office as his bank is failing. The fact that it’s just as likely to be a small business owner who has personally created six jobs (and is trying to maintain that payroll in a tough economy) doesn’t really get the headlines.

But it should. I have been thinking, of late, that there really needs to be a political party billing itself as the party of job creators. What this recession is revealing is that for all the complaints about overwork, Americans are happiest when they are gainfully employed. Most jobs are created by small businesses. These small businesses and their employees (and the growing population of free agents) could be a political force.

And so, I’ve been fascinated to see a new group calling itself the Free Enterprise Nation taking out ads in major media outlets this week pointing out that various governments are taxing the private sector to provide benefits and salaries for public employees that the private sector can’t afford. Between wages and benefits, the organization claims, the average public sector worker got $119,982 in 2008, compared with the average private sector worker’s salary and benefits take of $59,909.

I’m not entirely sure who is behind these ads — if it’s an “Astroturf” movement or what — but it got my attention. We shall see if anything comes of it.

Jonathan Last has an interesting essay on the Taste Page of the Wall Street Journal this morning about the economics of the Duggar family, stars of 18 Kids and Counting. According to the essay, it may soon by 19 kids and counting.

Raising lots of children is privately expensive but publicly beneficial, Last claims, in that they help prop up our Social Security system. I made a similar point in my USA Today op-ed last spring, “Bring on the Baby Boom.”

But attempts to figure out exactly what it costs to raise children are always difficult. For instance, Last writes that “The National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies reports that in 2008 the average cost of a full-time nanny was $9,630.”

This is fascinating, because the federal minimum wage is currently $7.25/hour. It was slightly lower in 2008, but still. In New York, payroll taxes come out to about 12% of payroll. So to employ someone legally as a nanny would cost at least $8.12 an hour. For 35 hours, the minimum definition of full-time, this comes out to more than $14,000 a year. And most people who have full-time nannies do so because they work full-time, meaning they need someone for a few more hours than that. A full year of 40 hour weeks comes out to over $16,000.

Leave aside the issue of tax evasion (which is widespread, as I found out while hiring a nanny– legally– recently). What’s most surprising to hear is that the average nanny is working for less than the federal minimum wage! This is not part of the Duggars’ economics, but something is not computing here.

My recent USA Today op-ed, The Princess Problem, is featured in the daily email from DailyWorth.com.

Interestingly, Amanda Steinberg, the site’s head, also recorded her time use on a recent day, pointing out how she works 45 or so hours per week (running two businesses), sleeps eight hours a night, and has lots of time to hang out with her two small children. Some similar themes from 168 Hours!

I’m looking for a few people willing to read 168 Hours (the book) and provide some constructive feedback. Please shoot me a message if you are interested. Thanks!

I have an essay on the Taste page of the Wall Street Journal this morning called “The Myth of the Overscheduled Child.”

The gist: For all the scolds like to fret about kids being pushed too hard, many children do absolutely no after-school sports or activities (and very little homework). The average child doesn’t spend too many hours on these things, and even children who spend more than 20 hours per week on activities don’t do badly because of it. That’s not to say that no child out there has been pushed to anxiety, but the problem is when this small slice of the American population sets the tone for the rest. It undercuts support for the additional school work and after-school activities that less privileged children truly need.

As a side note, the Wall Street Journal is the newspaper that actually gets delivered, in its physical, dead-tree format, to my house. I still get a thrill from opening a newspaper and seeing my byline in it. I suppose this is a thrill I’m going to need to get over as we advance into the digital age.

Here’s a transcript from today’s web chat. Next up, a radio interview: Life Talk with Wade Sorochan this PM (he’s in Alberta, AM 930 “The Light” in case I have any Canadian readers).

My column on self-regulation and academic achievement, “The Secret of School Success,” ran in USA Today this morning. There will be a “live” web chat with me at theforum.usatoday.com at 2pm Eastern today.  Please join me and submit questions!