text:
Economic base analysis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Economic base analysis was developed by Robert Murray Haig in his work on the Regional Plan of New York in 1928. Briefly, it posits that activities in an area divide into two categories: basic and nonbasic. Basic industries are those exporting from the region and bringing wealth from outside, while nonbasic (or service) industries support basic industries. Because of data problems, it is not practical to study industry output and trade flows to and from a region. As an alternative, the concepts of basic and nonbasic are operationalized using employment data.

The basic industries of a region are identified by comparing employment in the region to national norms. If the national norm for employment in, for example, Egyptian woodwind manufacturing is 5 percent and the region's employment is 8 percent, then 3 percent of the region's woodwind employment is basic. Once basic employment is identified, the outlook for basic employment is investigated sector by sector and projections made sector by sector. In turn, this permits the projection of total employment in the region. Typically the basic/nonbasic employment ratio is about 1:1. Extending by manipulation of data and comparisons, conjectures may be made about population and income. This is a rough, serviceable procedure, and it remains in use today. It has the advantage of being readily operationalized, fiddled with, and understandable.

The formula for computing location quotients can be written as:

LQ = \frac{e_i/e}{E_i/E}

e_i = Local employment in industry i

e = Total local employment

E_i = Reference area employment in industry i

E = Total reference area employment

It is assumed that the base year is identical in all of the above variables.

The figure showing location quotients uses data from Compare Minnesota: Profiles of Minnesota’s Economy and Population, 2002–2003. It uses the term location quotient, a number derived by comparing the percentage of employment in a place (Minnesota) with the percentage of employment nationwide. Minnesota has about the same percentage of high-technology employment as does the nation. It has more medical devices employment than the national average (due to companies such as Medtronic).

Economic base ideas are easy to understand, as are measures made of employment. For instance, it is well known that the economy of Seattle, Washington is tied to aircraft manufacturing, that of Detroit, Michigan, to automobiles, and that of Silicon Valley to high-tech manufacturing. When newspapers discuss the closing of military bases, they may say something like: "5,000 jobs at the base will be lost. That's going to hit the economy hard because it means a loss of 10,000 jobs in the community."

To forecast, the main procedure is to compare the region with the nation and national trends. If the economic base of a region is in industries that are declining nationwide, then the region faces a problem. If its economic base is concentrated in sectors that are growing, then it is in good shape.

Methodologically, economic base analysis views the region as if it were a small nation and uses notions of relative and comparative advantage from international trade theory (Charles Tiebout 1963). In a sense, the activity is macroeconomics "written small", and it has not been of much interest to urban economists in recent years because it does not get at within-city relationships. The analysis usually takes US growth patterns as a given. The fates of regions are determined by trends in the national economy.

Critique of the economic base concept[edit]

The economic base concept emerged in the 1920s, when economics focused on different industrial strengths and economic techniques were not as nuanced. The exporting (basic) activities were manufacturing and trade activities, and they could be readily identified in the data series. One could think of changes in those activities as causing growth or decline.

Today, export activities purchase many services, and the comparative advantage of an area may well lie in the services it produces. Peter Drucker (1986) imagines a world dominated by trade in ideas and designs. There is little merchandise trade because technology permits small-scale manufacturing. Such a world would change our ideas of what is considered basic.

The concept is that of a trading region, but in practice, economic base concepts are often applied to areas that fit the concept. The Minnesota study cited above compared Minnesota to the US. One can speak of the economic base of Saint Paul, Minneapolis, or Duluth, but to go on and compare such areas using economic base techniques is not very meaningful.

Forecasting is a precursor to actions, and there is no explicit way to get from the economic base to the kinds of actions most communities are interested in. That is, the economic base study does not say what to do. Leaders say they want desirable economic activities like high-tech ones. Indeed, we have seen studies of the transport needs of high-tech industries, studies done prior to investments to attract such industries (e.g., in Pennsylvania).

Even if one could make what-to-do linkages, the calculus of "desirable" is not simple. We suppose that high pay, little environmental damage, upward mobility for workers, and stability or growth are among the attributes desired of new activities. The table below gives information on the pay attribute. Clearly, that attribute must be traded off against other attributes.

Table: Average weekly earnings of production or non-supervisory workers on private non-farm payrolls by major industry, in current dollars
Industry Average weekly earnings (April 2003)
Mining: 774.58
Construction: 721.58
Manufacturing: 629.43
Transportation and public utilities: 670.32
Wholesale trade: 627.13
Retail trade: 296.80
Finance, insurance, and real estate: 611.90
Services: 507.43
Total private: 511.39

As H. Craig Davis points out, there are a number of assumptions on which economic base analysis is conducted. These include (1) that exports are the sole source of economic growth (investment, government spending, and household consumption are ignored); (2) that the export industry is homogeneous (i.e., that an increase or decrease of one export does not affect another); (3) the constancy of the export/service ratio; (4) that there is no inter-regional feedback; and (5) that there is a pool of underutilized resources.[1]

Quintero, James. 2007. Regional Economic Development: An Economic Base Study and Shift and Shares Analysis of Hays County, Texas. Applied Research Project. Texas State University.

  1. ^ Davis, H. Craig, Regional Impact Analysis and Project Evaluation, UBC Press, 1990.


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Type: response

text:
List of climbing knots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

There are many knots used in climbing, rappelling and mountaineering. Popular climbing knots are briefly described and depicted in this article.

Beer knot.JPG
Beer knot: The Beer knot is often used in tubular webbing, usually for making slings.
Double fisherman's knot WPK.jpg
Double fisherman knot (aka Grapevine):The Grapevine knot is useful to tie together two ends of ropes. Ropes can be of unequal sizes. It is often used to tie both ends of the same rope together to form a circle.
Triple fisherman's knot
Overhand bend WPK.jpg
Overhand bend (aka European death knot, Euro death knot, EDK):The Overhand bend is a simple and fast way to join two ropes, notably for rappelling. Can be very useful in situations where speed is critical to safety. It is similar to a water knot, but both bitter ends come out the same side of the knot.
Water knot WPK.jpg
Water knot (aka Tape Knot, Double Overhand Bend, Ring Bend):The Water knot is useful to tie together two ends of ropes. Often used with webbing.
Strangle knot WPK.jpg
Strangle knot: The Strangle knot is a simple binding knot. It forms both sides of a Double fisherman's knot, and is also used to back up loop knots and both ends of bends.
Bachmann knot WPK.jpg
Bachmann knot:The Bachmann knot is useful when the friction hitch needs to be reset quickly/often or made to be self-tending as in crevasse and self-rescue.
Clove hitch WPK.jpg
Clove hitch:The Clove hitch is used in belay systems among other things.
Italian hitch WPK.jpg
Italian hitch (aka Munter hitch, HMS):The Italian hitch is a simple knot, used by climbers and cavers as part of a life-lining or belay system. Its main use is as a friction device for controlling the rate of descent in belay systems.
Klemheist knot WPK.jpg
Klemheist knot:The Klemheist knot is an alternative to the Prusik knot, useful when the climber is short of cord but has plenty of webbing.
Prusik WPK.jpg
Prusik:The Prusik is a knot used mainly for emergency use. Some carry between one to three cords specifically for prusiks. One can be used to quickly secure a person's position to correct problems with equipment; two can be used as a method of ascending a rope.
Blakes hitch knot retouched.png
Blake's hitch:Blake's hitch is widely used in tree climbing applications. The knot can be slid up and down a line manually, but when loaded, it sticks securely.
Tête d'alouette.jpg
Girth hitch: This hitch is commonly used to attach loops of runner to harnesses, bags, other kinds of equipment, and to natural features like rock knobs or brush/tree trunks for protection.
Loop Knots
Alpine butterfly knot WPK.jpg
Alpine butterfly knot:The Alpine Butterfly is a strong and secure loop knot. Allows load distribution in multiple directions. It can also be used to isolate a worn section of rope.
Figure-of-eight loop 2 WPK.jpg
Figure-of-eight loop:The Figure-of-eight loop is considered strong and secure. Can be tied by taking a bight of rope and tying a figure-of-eight knot or can be tied directly around/through objects before weaving back through the first figure eight knot (Figure-of-eight follow through).
Inline figure-of-eight loop 2 WPK.jpg
Directional Figure-of-eight Loop: The Inline figure-of-eight loop is similar to a figure-of-eight loop but used to form a loop that will be loaded longitudinally in a line under tension. Particularly useful in rope tightening systems where the loop is established as a means to secure a pulley or carabiner onto the main line to reduce the amount of work needed to tighten the entire system. Similar to a trucker's hitch.
Double bowline: The double bowline is commonly used by sport climbers who take multiple lead falls and then have trouble untying their figure eights.
Double Figure-Eight Loop.jpg
Double Figure Eight Loop (aka Bunny Ears): Used for equalising two anchors using the rope.
Yosemite bowline: Also called a bowline with a Yosemite finish, this is another way of tying the rope to the harness.
Doppelter Palstek.jpg
Bowline on a bight: Used for equalizing anchors.
Stopper Knots
Stevedore knot WPK.jpg
Stevedore knot (aka Double figure eight):The Stevedore knot is tied at the end of a rope to prevent the end from unraveling, slipping through another knot, or passing back through a hole, block, or belay/rappel device. It is more bulky and less prone to jamming than the closely related figure-of-eight knot.
Overhand knot WPK.jpg
Overhand knot:The Overhand knot is a component of many knots used in climbing.
Monkey's fist WPK.jpg
Monkey's fist:The Monkey's Fist is used to tie the end of a climbing rope into a tight ball so the rope can be thrown farther/easier.

External links[edit]

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-179-60-89.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-27
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for June 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


text:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Glyptotherium texanum)
Jump to: navigation, search
G. arizonae
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Superorder: Xenarthra
Order: Cingulata
Family: Glyptodontidae
Genus: Glyptotherium
  • G. arizonae
  • G. cylindricum
  • G. floridanum
  • G. mexicanum
  • G. texanum

Glyptotherium is an extinct genus of glyptodontid, a group of extinct mammals related to the armadillo living from 4.1—1.5 Ma (AEO). The genus is considered an example of North American megafauna, of which most have become extinct. Glyptotherium may have been wiped out by climate change or human interference.[1]

Like its living relative, the armadillo, Glyptotherium had a shell which covered its entire body, similar to a turtle. However, unlike a turtle's shell, the Glyptotherium shell was made up of hundreds of small six-sided scales. Some species grew up to six feet long and its armor weighed up to a ton.

Remains of Glyptotherium species have been found in tropical and subtropical regions of Venezuela, Central America, Mexico, and the southern United States from Florida and South Carolina to Arizona.[1] There is no direct evidence of humans preying on the North American glyptodont.

Glyptotherium was named by Osborn in 1903, assigned to Glyptodontinae by Downing and White in 1995 and to Glyptodontidae by Osborn (1903), Brown (1912), Carroll (1988), Cisneros (2005) and Mead et al. (2007).

See also[edit]


text:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Developer(s) Gurobi Optimization
Stable release 6.0
Development status Active
Type Operations Research, Mathematical optimization
License Proprietary

The Gurobi Optimizer is a commercial optimization solver for linear programming (LP), quadratic programming (QP), quadratically constrained programming (QCP), mixed integer linear programming (MILP), mixed-integer quadratic programming (MIQP), and mixed-integer quadratically constrained programming (MIQCP). Gurobi is named for its founders: Zonghao Gu, Edward Rothberg and Robert Bixby; Bixby was also the founder of CPLEX, while Rothberg and Gu led the CPLEX development team for nearly a decade.[1]

The Gurobi Optimizer supports a variety of programming and modeling languages including:[2]

See also[edit]

CPLEX - another commercial optimizer, to which Gurobi founders contributed.

External links[edit]


text:
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (HACLA) is a state-chartered public agency. It provides the largest stock of affordable housing in Los Angeles and is one of the nation's leading public housing authorities. It is also one of the oldest, providing quality housing options and supportive services to the citizens of Los Angeles since 1938.

Its funds come from five main sources: HUD's annual operating subsidy, HUD's annual Capital Fund, Section 8 administrative fees, rent from public housing residents plus other program and capital grants from various sources. HACLA continues to explore alternative funding sources and has built numerous key partnerships with City and State agencies, nonprofit foundations, community-based organizations and private developers.

In July 1983, Mayor Tom Bradley disbanded the housing authority commission following allegations of mismanagement both by internal sources and by the Los Angeles Times. The City Council took control. After months of dispute, including former commissioners rallying housing project residents to support them, the new commission took control the following January with reduced powers.

Housing locations[edit]

The larger sites are:

Nickerson Gardens is the largest family large public housing development in Los Angeles with 1,066 units.

External links[edit]


text:
Little Bill (TV series)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Little Bill
Created by Bill Cosby
Directed by Robert Scull
Jennifer Oxley
Olexa Hewryk
Mark Salisbury
Starring [1]
Country of origin United States
Original language(s) English
No. of seasons 4
No. of episodes 52[2]
Running time 30 minutes
Production company(s) Nickelodeon Animation Studio
Distributor Paramount Domestic Television
Original channel Nickelodeon
Original release November 28, 1999 (1999-11-28) – February 6, 2004 (2004-02-06)

Little Bill is an American animated children's television series produced for Nick Jr. The stories are based on Bill Cosby's Little Bill book series, set in Philadelphia,[3] and feature Bill Jr. learning a lesson or moral. It was developed through research and in consultation with a panel of educational consultants.[4]

The show also aired on CBS as part of Nick Jr. on CBS, from September 16, 2000[5] – September 7, 2002, then as part of Nick on CBS from August 2, 2003 – September 10, 2005. The show returned with the return of Nick Jr. on CBS on September 17, 2005, and seen through September 9, 2006, when the block was replaced with KOL Secret Slumber Party (which became: Cookie Jar TV).

Sonia Manzano, best known for playing Maria Rodriguez on Sesame Street, was a frequent writer for the show.[citation needed]

William "Bill/Little Bill" Glover Jr.
An inquisitive and imaginative boy who loves his hamster and is a fan of the fictional Blue Sox Baseball Team. He also likes Captain Brainstorm because he comes up with great ideas. He enjoys going to kindergarten, although he misses Elephant, but he is still happy. He is known as Little Bill because his actual name is Bill Jr; his father's name is also Bill. Little Bill is based on Bill Cosby's son, Ennis William Cosby, and was voiced by Xavier Prichett.
Elephant is a small light yellow hamster who loves Little Bill. The only noises that are heard from him is his blinking eyes after Little Bill has spoken and he sneezes in one episode. When the rest of the family goes on vacations, he is left alone with Alice the Great, Little Bill's great–grandmother. He gets sick in "Get Well Elephant", but gets better at the end.
April Glover
The oldest of the Glover children, She is a highly talented basketball player on the school team, and also at basketball camp, where she won a trophy and is also in a choir. She is often seen getting bossy. (She sometimes argues with Bobby.) She is the only sister. She was voiced by Monique Beasley.
Robert "Bobby" Glover
Bobby is the most studious of the kids. He is always reading and investigating things. He is the middle child, and oldest son of the Glover children. He can also play the violin, and sometimes he can say upsetting things, usually resulting in his family saying, "Bobby!". He was voiced by Devon Malik Beckford (Season 1–2), and then Tyler James Williams (Season 3–4).
William "Bill/Big Bill" Glover Sr.
Father of Bobby, April, and Little Bill. They have a very close relationship with their father. He works for the Department of Housing, as a housing inspector. His hobby is collecting and listening to jazz records. He is also known as Big Bill because his actual name is Bill Sr. He was voiced by Gregory Hines.
Brenda Glover
Little Bill, Bobby, and April's mother. Wife of Big Bill, she works for a bank (seen in "Mom's Trip"), but her hobby is photography. She was voiced by Phylicia Rashad.
Alice the Great
Great-Grandmother of Little Bill, Bobby, April, and Jamal; Alice is also Brenda and Deborah's grandmother (see "The Magic Quilt"). Alice the Great has an older brother and older sister (see "The Surprise") and a cousin who lives in Cincinnati. Usually teaches Little Bill lessons and tells stories to him. She also lives with the family. She was voiced by Ruby Dee.
Captain Brainstorm
Captain Brainstorm is an astronaut, who has an orange rocket and an orange space suit. Little Bill is a fan of his TV show, Space Explorers. Captain Brainstorm has a dog called Spark–E, whose tagline, "Ruff–Roo!", is in a dog accent. He was voiced by Bill Cosby.
Andrew Mulligan
Andrew is a red haired, freckled boy who is Little Bill's best friend. Andrew and Little Bill have many things in common - they both like Captain Brainstorm or play with construction sets, etc. In one episode "Copy Cat" Little Bill and Andrew have a quarrel and Andrew calls Little Bill a copy cat, but soon learns his lesson and apologizes to him. Andrew has a pet dog named Farfy. Andrew is sometimes seen with his cousins: Kevin and Rachel. He lives two houses away from Little Bill. He was voiced by Zach Tyler Eisen.
Kiku Wong
Kiku is a friend of Little Bill's. Little Bill would say that she is the nicest of his friends. She loves nature (particularly flowers) and origami (her grandmother, Ms. Natsuko, showed Little Bill how to make origami in the episode "Shipwreck Saturday"). She was voiced by Eunice Cho.
Fuchsia Glover
Fuchsia is the paternal cousin of Little Bill, Bobby, and April. Her father Al (Big Bill's brother) runs a shop close to Little Bill's house. Fuchsia's mother is named Vanessa. She was voiced by Kianna Underwood. She goes to school with Little Bill.
Classroom friend of Little Bill (see "New Foods" and "Natural Root Pals"). Teaches Little Bill about experiencing the Latino culture, by inviting him to dinner. Dorado introduces Bill to "arroz con guandules y platanos" (chicken with rice and bananas). Dorado is a bit of a comedian.
Grandson of Alice the Great's best friend Emmaline, uses a wheelchair to get around because he was born with cerebral palsy. He and Little Bill are good friends and pretend to be dinosaurs together; Monty's favourite is the tyrannosaurus rex. He was voiced by Zach Tyler Eisen.
Michael Rhiley
A classmate of Little Bill's who moves to the neighborhood from Miami, Florida. He is mean to Little Bill and his friends at first, but he soon learns his lesson. He is then a very good friend to Little Bill. He sleeps over at Little Bill's house in one episode and in the next episode, he plays in the snow with Little Bill for the first time. He was voiced by Zach Tyler Eisen.
Miss Aisha Murray–Clinkscales
Little Bill's teacher, who later marries Dr. Winthrop Clinkscales (But the students are still allowed to call her Miss Murray, since they have trouble pronouncing her husband's surname). Their engagement was mentioned in "The Ring Bear" and they were married in "Miss Murray's Wedding." She was voiced by Ayo Haynes.
Dr. Winthrop Clinkscales
Mrs. Murray's new husband. He is a doctor, and treats Little Bill when he breaks his arm in "A Trip to the Hospital."
Mrs. Shapiro
A Hawaiian lady, with a cat named Sophie. She was Little Bill's neighbor but then moved back to Hawaii, in the episode "Same Moon, Same Sun, Same Star," to live with her sister Mimi. She was voiced by Madeline Kahn in her first appearance, and later by Kathy Najimy.
Mr. Miguel Rojas
Mr. Rojas is an old man who speaks English and Spanish. He moved into Mrs. Shapiro's house and met Little Bill in the episode "The New Neighbours." He has a dog called Lito who's good at doing tricks. He only appears in "The New Neighbours," "Doggie Magic," "The Early Bill," and "The Halloween Party." He has children, but they're all grown up and have families of their own. He was voiced by Victor Argo.
Mr. Clark Terry
Alice the Great and Little Bill's new friend. He teaches Little Bill how to skip rocks and make music with a reed. He plays the flugelhorn. He was voiced by Clark Terry, whom he is named and modelled after.
Baby Jamal
Little Bill's maternal baby cousin, son of Deborah (Brenda's sister) and Gary.
Percy Mulch
The owner of a pet shop. He knows all about animals, but is a bit clumsy, and has a hard time remembering the first names of Little Bill's parents. He was voiced by Doug E. Doug.
Mr. Williams
A music store owner from "The Musical Instrument." He is a talented musician, and shows Little Bill the piano, accordion, saxophone, and drums (which happens to be his grandson's favourite instrument).
Aunt Deborah
Aunt Deborah is the wife of Uncle Gary and the mother of Baby Jamal. She is Little Bill, Bobby, and April's maternal aunt. She appears in "Just a Baby" when she and Gary came over to her sister's house, to show them baby Jamal.

Season Episodes Originally aired
First aired Last aired
1 9 November 28, 1999 (1999-11-28) June 19, 2000 (2000-06-19)
2 12 September 4, 2000 (2000-09-04) December 4, 2000 (2000-12-04)
3 12 May 7, 2001 (2001-05-07) November 25, 2002 (2002-11-25)
4 19 February 18, 2003 (2003-02-18) February 6, 2004 (2004-02-06)

Season 1 (1999–2000)[edit]

No. in
Title Original air date[6]
1 "Just A Baby / The Campout" November 28, 1999

Just a Baby: Little Bill's baby cousin Jamal visits and Little Bill learns about babies from Brenda, Big Bill, and Bobby.
The Campout: Little Bill and Andrew pretend to camp out in the backyard.

NOTE: This episode was dedicated to Madeline Kahn, who voiced Mrs. Shapiro and died on December 3, 1999.
2 "The Treasure Hunt / The Best Way to Play" November 28, 1999

The Treasure Hunt: Little Bill goes on a treasure hunt in order to keep himself occupied on a rainy day.

Best Way to Play: Little Bill learns that things that you want can be expensive, such as a video game. Andrew gets a Captain Brainstorm video game, but Little Bill and his friends learn that pretending to be characters and going outside to play is better.
3 "Monty's Roar / Natural Root Pals" December 12, 1999

Monty's Roar: Little Bill meets Monty, a handicapped boy who likes dinosaurs.

Natural Root Pals: Little Bill's friend Dorado helps him past the time while their mothers get their hair done at a beauty parlor.
4 "The Dollar / The Choice" December 19, 1999

The Dollar: Little Bill finds a dollar bill and is curious on what to spend it on.

The Choice: Little Bill wants to choose a breakfast cereal during a trip to the supermarket.
5 "Guppies / The Magic Quilt" January 9, 2000

Guppies: Little Bill takes swimming lessons with his cousin Fuchsia. He is a bit scared of the big pool at first, but soon gets used to it.

The Magic Quilt: Little Bill is afraid of the dark, but a quilt from Alice the Great helps overcome his fear of it.
6 "The Meanest Thing to Say / Lavatory Story" February 6, 2000

The Meanest Thing to Say: A new boy at school named Michael bullies Little Bill and his friends.

Lavatory Story: Little Bill tries to show Michael to the bathroom, or the "lavatory".
7 "The Zoo / My Pet Elephant" February 20, 2000

The Zoo: Little Bill's class goes on a field trip to the zoo.

My Pet Elephant: Little Bill gets a pet hamster and decides to name it "Elephant".
8 "Little Bill's Adventure with Captain Brainstorm" June 4, 2000
Little Bill and his friends go to the mall to see Captain Brainstorm.
9 "Chicken Pox / Shipwreck Saturday" June 19, 2000

Chicken Pox: Little Bill has had the chicken pox for days.

Shipwreck Saturday: Little Bill builds a toy boat, but it gets destroyed by a careless man in a canoe.

Season 2 (2000)[edit]

No. in
Title Original air date[6]
1 "Zoopity Zoo / Neighborhood Park" September 4, 2000

Zoopity Zoo: Little Bill learns how to make cleaning his room fun.

Neighborhood Park: Little Bill and his friends and family turn a vacant lot into a park.
2 "Elephant on the Loose / If a Bird Rings, Answer it" September 5, 2000

Elephant on the Loose: Elephant gets lost in the house, so the family tries to find him.

If a Bird Rings, Answer it: Little Bill finds a lost parrot with an abnormal talent.
3 "Big Kid / The Bills Go To Work" September 6, 2000

Big Kid: Little Bill acts like a big kid.

The Bills Go to Work: Big Bill takes Little Bill to his work to show him what he does.
4 "The Promise / The Practice" September 7, 2000

The Promise: Little Bill borrows his sister April's basketball trophy for show-and-tell, but when at school, his friends break it.

The Practice: April takes Little Bill to basketball practice.
5 "Are We There Yet? / Super Family Fun Land!" September 8, 2000

Are We There Yet?: Little Bill and his family take a road trip to an amusement park.

Super Family Fun Land: The family spends time at Super Family Fun Land. in this episode Branda drives the car
6 "The Ring Bear / Miss Murray's Wedding" September 12, 2000

The Ring Bear: Little Bill is going to be the ring bearer for his teacher's wedding.

Miss Murray's Wedding: Miss Murray gets married to a doctor named Winthrop Clinkscales.
7 "The Birthday Present / The Birthday Party" September 13, 2000

The Birthday Present: Little Bill unintentionally ruins Fuchsia's birthday present.

The Birthday Party: Little Bill attends Fuchsia's birthday party.
8 "A Trip to the Hospital / The Wrong Thing to Do" September 14, 2000

A Trip to the Hospital: Little Bill breaks his arm and goes to the hospital.

The Wrong Thing to Do: Little Bill is upset that he has to stay inside due to his broken arm and he draws on April's door!
9 "Making Mother's Day / Picture Perfect" September 15, 2000

Making Mother's Day: Little Bill forgets to bring his mother's day gift to her mother from school. It's up to him to find something else as a gift for her mother for Mother's Day.

Picture Perfect: Little Bill learns how to use a camera.
10 "Rolling Along / The Stage Trick" October 9, 2000

Rolling Along: Little Bill tries to learn to roll.

The Stage Trick: Little Bill gets stage fright while practicing for a school play.
11 "The Snack Helper / Buds" November 13, 2000

The Snack Helper: Little Bill faces a tough decision on whom to send to the snack table first as the snack helper.

Buds: Little Bill and Andrew learn about nature.
12 "Copy Cat / Picture Day" December 4, 2000

Copy Cat: Little Bill is upset when Andrew calls him a copy cat.

Picture Day: Little Bill wants to pick out his own clothes for Picture Day.

Season 3 (2001–02)[edit]

No. in
Title Original air date[6]
1 "Ready, Set, Read! / I Got a Letter" May 7, 2001

Ready, Set, Read!: Little Bill wants to learn how to read.

I Got a Letter: Little Bill learns how to write letters.
2 "The Violin Lessons / Squirmy" May 9, 2001

The Violin Lessons: Little Bill accidentally upsets Bobby when he makes fun of the way he plays the violin.

Squirmy: Little Bill finds an earthworm and wants to keep it as a pet.
3 "Monty's Visit / Mom's Trip" May 10, 2001

Monty's Visit: Little Bill is jealous of Monty being with Alice the Great.

Mom's Trip: Brenda goes on a business trip and Little Bill misses her terribly.
4 "The No-Talking Contest / The Search is for the Sock" May 11, 2001

The No-Talking Contest: Little Bill and his siblings have a no-talking contest.

The Search is for the Sock: Little Bill loses one of April's lucky socks.
5 "The Halloween Costume / The Haunted Halloween Party" October 26, 2001

The Halloween Costume: Little Bill is upset that a Captain Brainstorm costume he wanted is sold out.

The Haunted Halloween Party: A party occurs at town on Halloween.
6 "Merry Christmas Little Bill" December 3, 2001
Little Bill is afraid that Alice the Great won't be home in time for Christmas, due to the fact that she is stuck at the Cincinnati Airport.
7 "A Day at the Beach / The Get Well Song" February 12, 2002

A Day at the Beach: Little Bill and his family go to the beach.

The Get Well Song: Little Bill helps his sick father feel better.
8 "Michael Sleeps Over / Michael's First Snow" March 6, 2002

Michael Sleeps Over: Michael sleeps over at Little Bill's house.

Michael's First Snow: Little Bill helps Michael get used to snow.
9 "Monty Joins the Class / Dad Goes to School" March 13, 2002

Monty Joins the Class: Monty joins Little Bill's class.

Dad Goes to School: Big Bill goes to Little Bill's school to tell his class how his jobs works.
10 "Number One on Honeywood Street / Baseball Glovers" March 19, 2002

Number One on Honeywood Street: Little Bill and Andrew's families compete. April was being too bossy about winning.

Baseball Glovers: Little Bill's entire family plays baseball at a family reunion.
11 "Little Bill's Giant Space Adventure" July 8, 2002
Max and Little Bill have to save Captain Brainstorm From the giant purbuls
12 "Wabbit Worries / Wabbit Babies" November 25, 2002

Wabbit Worries: Little Bill is concerned about one of the class' pet rabbits.

Wabbit Babies: Little Bill tries to find a place for the baby rabbits to live.

Season 4 (2003–04)[edit]

No. in
Title Original air date[6]
1 "The Car Keys / Doggie Sitting" February 18, 2003

The Car Keys: Little Bill accidentally loses his father's car keys.

Doggie Sitting: Little Bill and his siblings try to take care of a neighbor's dog.
2 "New Foods / Elephant Tricks" February 19, 2003

New Foods: Little Bill tries new foods when he visits Dorado.

Elephant Tricks: Little Bill tries to get Elephant to do tricks.
3 "What About Me? / Happy Not Birthday To You" February 20, 2003

What About Me?: Little Bill feels left out.

Happy Not Birthday to You: Little Bill wants to cheer up April when she loses the basketball championship.
4 "Racing Time / All Tied Up" February 21, 2003

Racing Time: Little Bill is late for school due to dawdling.

All Tied Up: Little Bill wants to learn to tie his shoes.
5 "Echo Falls / Going Fishing" July 28, 2003

Echo Falls: Little Bill, Fuchsia and their fathers hike to Echo Falls.

Going Fishing: Little Bill wants to catch a fish.
6 "The Best Book Ever! / A Ramp for Monty" July 29, 2003

The Best Book Ever!: Little Bill gets a library card and checks out books.

A Ramp for Monty: Little Bill and Big Bill build a ramp for Monty to make it easier for him to get into the backyard.
7 "The New Babysitter* / My Friend Isabel" July 30, 2003

The New Babysitter: Little Bill gets a new babysitter, Isabel.

My Friend Isabel: Little Bill doesn't want Isabel to leave.
8 "The Early Bill / Going Camping" July 31, 2003

The Early Bill: Little Bill gets up early.

Going Camping: Little Bill and Big Bill camp out in the backyard.
9 "Same Moon, Same Sun, Same Star / All Together Now" September 22, 2003

Same Moon, Same Sun, Same Star: Mrs. Shapiro is moving away to Hawaii*.

All Together Now: Little Bill wants to run away to avoid taking a nap.
10 "The Surprise! / Good ol' Lightnin'" September 23, 2003

The Surprise!: Little Bill makes a surprise present for Alice the Great.

Good ol' Lightnin': Little Bill finds Alice the Great's old wagon. Ol' Lightnin'.
11 "The Musical Instrument / The Choir" September 24, 2003

The Musical Instrument: Little Bill wants to play an instrument.

The Choir: Little Bill assists April's choir when one of singers is sick.
12 "The Incredible Shrinking Little Bill / The Big Swings" September 25, 2003

The Incredible Shrinking Little Bill: Little Bill thinks he's shrinking.

The Big Swings: Bobby accidentally scares Little Bill by pushing him too high on the swings.
13 "New Neighbors / Doggie Magic" September 26, 2003

New Neighbors: Little Bill has new neighbors.

Doggie Magic: Little Bill spends time with Mr. Rojas' dog, Miguelito (or Lito for short).
14 "I Can Sign / The Sign for Friend" September 26, 2003

I Can Sign: Little Bill learns sign language.

The Sign for Friend: Little Bill and Andrew make a new friend.
15 "Summertime in the Wintertime / Snow Racer" February 2, 2004

Summertime in the Wintertime: Little Bill pretends that it's summertime in the wintertime.

Snow Racer: Little Bill and Michael build a snow race car, but the snowcar melts as it gets warmer outside.
16 "Get Well, Elephant / Elephant's Best Friend" February 3, 2004

Get Well, Elephant: Elephant is sick, so Little Bill takes care of him.

Elephant's Best Friend: Little Bill wants to get Elephant a best friend.
17 "The Skating Lesson / Mr. Moth" February 4, 2004

The Skating Lesson: April teaches Little Bill how to skate.

Mr. Moth: Little Bill waits for his moth to hatch.
18 "Private Time / Never" February 5, 2004

Private Time: Little Bill and Brenda have some private time.

Never: Little Bill and Alice the Great make a new friend, Clarke Terry.
19 "When Friends Get Mad / The Party Box" February 6, 2004

When Friends Get Mad: Little Bill gets mad at Kiku after she accidentally spills water on his picture and refuses to apologize after he crumples up her picture in return, and later has a time-out.

The Party Box: Little Bill is disappointed when he finds that his parents and Alice the Great are having an adult party and he can't come.

Video games[edit]

Little Bill Thinks Big, released on 29 September 2003, is for the Windows XP & Macintosh.[7]

Emmy Awards

Peabody Award

See also[edit]

  1. ^ "Monty's Roar/Natural Root Pals". Little Bill. Season 1. Episode 1. 23 minutes in.
  2. ^ Little Bill Episodes -
  3. ^ "Nickelodeon's 'Little Bill' Debuts as First African American Balloon In 76th Annual Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade". Retrieved 13 September 2013.
  4. ^ "Little Bill". Retrieved February 10, 2008.
  5. ^ Shrivastava, K M (2005). Broadcast Journalism in the 21st Century. New Dawn Press Group. p. 56. Retrieved February 20, 2015.
  6. ^ a b c d "Little Bill Episodes". Archived from the original on August 26, 2014. Retrieved January 9, 2015.
  7. ^ "Little Bill Thinks Big". Retrieved 15 May 2015.
  8. ^ 61st Annual Peabody Awards, May 2002.

External links[edit]


text:
Louis Balsan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Louis Balsan (22 October 1911 – 1982) was a French bobsledder who competed in the 1930s. He later became a writer in the 1950s, discussing his involvement in World War II espionage and the history of mountain climbing in the Pyrenees. He was born in Paris.

Bobsleigh career[edit]

Competing in two Winter Olympics, Balsan earned his best finish of ninth in the four-man event at Garmisch-Partenkirchen in 1936. At the 1932 Winter Olympics he and Daniel Armand-Delille finished eleventh in the two-man event

Other activities[edit]

Balsan was later arrested by the Gestapo in 1942 during World War II for participating in resistance activities. He was taken to Mauthausen and then Loibl Pass, until the 8th Army (UK) liberated the area in 1945. He wrote a testimony of his life in concentration camps in Le Ver Luisant. Other books written by fellow prisoners include Karawanken (memoirs of Gaston Charlet) and The Tunnel (a novel based on the author's experiences). the history of mountain climbing in the Pyrennes. Balsan died in 1982.


text:
Merchant's House Museum

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Old Merchant's House
(Seabury Tredwell House)
WTM tony 0079.jpg
Merchant's House Museum is located in New York City
Merchant's House Museum
Location 29 East Fourth Street, Manhattan, New York City
Coordinates 40°43′39.36″N 73°59′32.59″W / 40.7276000°N 73.9923861°W / 40.7276000; -73.9923861Coordinates: 40°43′39.36″N 73°59′32.59″W / 40.7276000°N 73.9923861°W / 40.7276000; -73.9923861
Built 1832
Architectural style Federal-style (exterior)
Greek revival (interior)
Governing body private
NRHP Reference # 66000548[1]
Significant dates
Added to NRHP October 15, 1966[1]
Designated NHL June 23, 1965[2]
Designated NYCL 1965, interior 1981

The Merchant's House Museum, known formerly as the Old Merchant's House and as the Seabury Tredwell House, is the only nineteenth-century family home in New York City preserved intact — both inside and out. Built "on spec" in 1832 by Joseph Brewster, a hatter by trade, it is located at 29 East Fourth Street, between Lafayette Street and the Bowery in Manhattan. It became a museum in 1936, founded by George Chapman, a cousin of the family who once lived there.

Of note, the House was among the first 20 buildings designated in 1965 under the City’s new landmarks law. It is the only historic house museum in the Greenwich Village/Soho/NoHo neighborhoods and celebrated 75 years as a museum in 2011.

Joseph Brewster, the builder, sold the house to Seabury Tredwell, a wealthy New York merchant, for $18,000.[citation needed] Tredwell's daughter, Gertrude, was born in the house in 1840.

Gertrude and her seven siblings, two brothers and five sisters, all lived in the house together with their parents, four servants, and an ever-changing assortment of nieces, nephews, cousins, aunts and other relatives. Only two daughters and one son ever married, which was unusual for that era and for an affluent family with social position.

Seabury died in 1865 and the remaining family lived at the home into old age. Gertrude, the youngest member of the immediate family, lived here alone for 24 years after the death of her sister Julia in 1909. As she grew older and more eccentric she became obsessed with holding on to the elegant home in a neighborhood that had become, by the early 20th century, a run-down, semi-industrial, and disreputable part of town. Burdened with severe financial hardship in her last years, she somehow managed to keep the beautiful home in nearly original condition, long after all the neighboring private homes had been demolished or converted into rooming houses, tenements, or commercial structures.

After her death, a distant cousin, George Chapman, purchased the building, saving it from foreclosure and demolition. In 1936, after needed repair and renovation, the house opened as a museum and has remained one since. The Merchant’s House Museum remains a unique time capsule of the lives of a typical affluent New York merchant family of the 19th Century, complete with the original possessions of the family.

Architecture and design[edit]

The building has been attributed to architect Menard Lafever.[3] Its facade is reminiscent of earlier Federal-style homes, but the interior, especially the formal double parlors, represent New York's finest example of Greek revival architecture. The interior also contains the Tredwell family's original furnishings, including pieces from prominent New York cabinetmakers, like Duncan Phyfe and Joseph Meeks.

Considered one of the finest surviving Greek Revival rowhouses in America, the house is a miraculous survivor of old New York. The house is important for its outstanding collection of original furnishings, decorative objects, magnificently preserved 19th century clothing and other personal effects of the Tredwell family. Stepping through the front portal is stepping into a time when New York City was becoming the most important seaport in North America and the house reflects these fortunate circumstances.

The building underwent a major restoration in 1971 by architect Joseph Roberto and interior designer Carolyn Roberto.[4]

Landmark designations[edit]

Due to its architectural and historic importance, the Merchant's House has been recognized with the following landmark designations:

Several doors east of the museum at 37 East 4th Street is the Samuel Tredwell Skidmore House, a Greek Revival house built for a cousin of Seabury Tredwell. That building is also a New York City Landmark (designated 1970), but is in disrepair and in need of restoration.[4]

Living Room

In addition to its magnificent period rooms, the museum presents many performances, presentations, lectures, exhibits and special events throughout the year. Ongoing research and state-of-the-art documentation and conservation techniques assure that more is constantly being learned about the house, its furnishings and outstanding textile collections, and “what life was really like” for a 19th-century New York family.

In 1991, in a joint effort with the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation, the Merchant’s House Museum launched the educational program, "Greenwich Village: History and Historic Preservation". The program was designed to teach students local history, architectural vocabulary, and the fundamentals of historic preservation. The program ran through the end of the 1990s at the museum, but eventually shifted its focus to the West Village, where it continues to reach out to students in the five boroughs.[5]

The Museum’s collection of over 3,000 items comprises the possessions of the Tredwells, the wealthy merchant-class family who lived in the House from 1835 to 1933. The collection includes furniture, decorative arts, clothing, photographs and books, household items, and personal items. Highlights include a suite of 12 mahogany side chairs attributed to renowned furniture maker Duncan Phyfe, a pair of matching six-globe gas chandeliers, and 40 dresses and numerous fashion accessories that belonged to the Tredwell women.

See also[edit]

  1. ^ a b "National Register Information System". National Register of Historic Places. National Park Service. 2010-07-09.
  2. ^ a b "Old Merchant's House (Seabury Tredwell House)". National Historic Landmark summary listing. National Park Service. 2007-09-15.
  3. ^ a b Richard Greenwood (July 16, 1975). "National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination: The Old Merchant's House" (PDF). National Park Service.  and Accompanying 2 photos, exterior, from 1975 PDF (574 KB)
  4. ^ a b c d New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission; Postal, Matthew A. (ed. and text); Dolkart, Andrew S. (text). (2009) Guide to New York City Landmarks (4th ed.) New York: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-28963-1, p. 63
  5. ^ The Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation. "Greenwich Village: History and Historic Preservation".

External links[edit]


text:
Merrill Lynch Domestic Master

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Merrill Lynch Domestic Master is a common American Bond index, analogous to the S&P 500 for stocks, owned by Merrill Lynch. The Domestic Master is similar to the Salomon BIG or the Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond Index (The Agg). The Domestic Master Index was created on December 31, 1975. The index is re-balanced on the last calendar day of the month.

The Domestic Master Index (Ticker D0A0) is part of the larger Merrill Lynch US Broad Market (US00). The Domestic Master follows the US dollar denominated investment grade Public Corporate and Government debt. Treasuries, mortgage-backed securities, global bonds (debt issued simultaneously in the eurobond and US domestic bond markets) and some Yankee Bonds (debt of foreign issuers issued in the US domestic market) are included in the Domestic Master Index.

However, the Domestic Master index excludes asset-backed securities (ABS), tax-exempt municipal debt, 144As and any bond without a fixed coupon schedule, less than a $1 billion outstanding for US Treasuries and $150 million for all other securities, and less than one year remaining term to maturity.

See also[edit]

External links[edit]


text:
This is a good article. Click here for more information.

Moberly–Jourdain incident

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Moberly-Jourdain incident)
Jump to: navigation, search
The Petit Trianon in 2005, where the incident purportedly took place. Photograph taken from the direction of the Temple de l'Amour.

The Moberly–Jourdain incident, or the Ghosts of Petit Trianon or Versailles (French: les fantômes du Trianon / les fantômes de Versailles) was an event that occurred on 10 August 1901 in the gardens of the Petit Trianon, involving two female academics, Charlotte Anne Moberly (1846–1937) and Eleanor Jourdain (1863–1924).

The women were both from educated backgrounds; Moberly's father was a teacher and a bishop, and Jourdain's father was a vicar. During a trip to Versailles, they visited the Petit Trianon, a small château in the grounds of the Palace of Versailles, where they allegedly experienced a time slip, and saw Marie Antoinette as well as other people of the same period.

After researching the history of the palace, and comparing notes of their experience, they published their work pseudonymously in a book entitled An Adventure, under the names of Elizabeth Morison and Frances Lamont, in 1911. Their story caused a sensation, and was subject to much ridicule.

Moberly, born in 1846, was the tenth of fifteen children.[1] She came from a professional background; her father, George Moberly, was the headmaster of Winchester College and later Bishop of Salisbury.[2][3] In 1886 Moberly became the first Principal of a hall of residence for young women, St. Hugh's College in Oxford.[4] It became apparent that Moberly needed someone to help run the college, and Jourdain was asked to become Moberly's assistant.[5]

Jourdain, born in 1863, was the eldest of ten children[6] and her father, the Reverend Francis Jourdain, was the vicar of Ashbourne in Derbyshire. She was the sister of art historian Margaret Jourdain and mathematician Philip Jourdain.[7] She went to school in Manchester, unlike most girls of the time who were educated at home.[5]

Jourdain was also the author of several textbooks, ran a school of her own, and after the incident became the vice-Principal of St. Hugh's College.[8] Before Jourdain was appointed, it was decided that the two women should get to know one another better; Jourdain owned an apartment in Paris where she tutored English children, and so Moberly went to stay with her.[5]

The incident[edit]

As part of several trips, the two women decided to visit the Palace of Versailles, as they were both unfamiliar with it. On 10 August 1901, they travelled by train to Versailles. They did not think much of the palace after touring it,[5] so they decided to walk through the gardens to the Petit Trianon.[9] On the way, they reached the Grand Trianon and found it was closed to the public.[5]

They travelled with a Baedeker guidebook, but the two women soon became lost after missing the turn for the main avenue, Allée des Deux Trianons. They passed this road, and entered a lane, where unknown to them they passed their destination.[9] Moberly noticed a woman shaking a white cloth out of a window[10] and Jourdain noticed an old deserted farmhouse, outside of which was an old plough.[10]

At this point they claimed that a feeling of oppression and dreariness came over them.[11] They then saw some men who looked like palace gardeners, who told them to go straight on. Moberly later described the men as "very dignified officials, dressed in long greyish green coats with small three-cornered hats."[12] Jourdain noticed a cottage with a woman and a girl in the doorway. The woman was holding out a jug to the girl.[10] Jourdain described it as a "tableau vivant", a living picture, much like Madame Tussauds waxworks. Moberly did not observe the cottage, but felt the atmosphere change. She wrote: "Everything suddenly looked unnatural, therefore unpleasant; even the trees seemed to become flat and lifeless, like wood worked in tapestry. There were no effects of light and shade, and no wind stirred the trees."[13]

The Comte de Vaudreuil was later suggested as a candidate for the man with the marked face allegedly seen by Moberly and Jourdain.

They reached the edge of a wood, close to the Temple de l'Amour, and came across a man seated beside a garden kiosk, wearing a cloak and large shady hat.[14] According to Moberly, his appearance was "most repulsive... its expression odious. His complexion was dark and rough."[15] Jourdain noted "The man slowly turned his face, which was marked by smallpox; his complexion was very dark. The expression was evil and yet unseeing, and though I did not feel that he was looking particularly at us, I felt a repugnance to going past him.[15] A man later described as "tall... with large dark eyes, and crisp curling black hair under a large sombrero hat" came up to them, and showed them the way to the Petit Trianon.[16]

Portrait of Marie Antoinette by Wertmüller. The figure that Moberly saw near the Petit Trianon was claimed to bear a resemblance to the Queen as depicted in this painting

After crossing a bridge, they reached the gardens in front of the palace, and Moberly noticed a lady sketching on the grass who looked at them.[17] She later described what she saw in great detail: the lady was wearing a light summer dress, on her head was a shady white hat, and she had lots of fair hair. Moberly thought she was a tourist at first, but the dress appeared to be old-fashioned. Moberly came to believe that the lady was Marie Antoinette. Jourdain however did not see the lady.[18]

After this, they were directed round to the entrance and joined a party of other visitors.[19] After touring the house, they had tea at the Hotel des Reservoirs before returning to Jourdain's apartment.

After leaving Versailles, neither Jourdain nor Moberly mentioned the incident to one another until a week later. Moberly wrote a letter about the trip to her sister,[19] and when she got to the afternoon of the Versailles incident she asked Jourdain if she thought the Petit Trianon was haunted. Jourdain told her that she thought it was. Three months later in Oxford[20] they compared their notes, and decided to write separate accounts of what happened, and research the history of the Trianon. In doing so, they found that on 10 August 1792, the Tuileries palace in Paris was besieged, the king's Swiss guards were massacred, and the monarchy itself was abolished six weeks later.

They visited the Trianon gardens again on several occasions, but were unable to trace the path they took. Various landmarks such as the kiosk and the bridge were missing, and the grounds were full of people. Trying to come up with an explanation, they wondered if they had stumbled across a private party, or an event booked that day. However they found that nothing had been booked that afternoon.[19] During their research, they thought they recognised the man by the kiosk as the Comte de Vaudreuil, a friend of Marie Antoinette, who herself had been thought to have been seen by Moberly.

Convinced that the grounds were haunted, they decided to publish their findings in a book An Adventure (1911), under the pseudonyms of Elizabeth Morison and Frances Lamont. The book, containing the claim that Marie Antoinette had been encountered in 1901, caused a sensation. However, many critics did not take it seriously on the grounds of the implausibilities and inconsistencies that it was thought to contain. A review of the book in the Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research suggested that the women had misinterpreted normal events that they had experienced.[n 1] In 1903, an old map of the Trianon gardens was found and showed a bridge that the two women had claimed to have crossed that had not been on any other map.[21] The identity of the authors of An Adventure was not made public until 1931.

Both women are reported to have had many paranormal experiences before and after their adventure.[22] In one of them Moberly claimed to have seen in the Louvre in 1914 an apparition of the Roman emperor Constantine, a man of unusual height wearing a gold crown and a toga; he was not observed by anybody else.[23] During the First World War Jourdain, the dominant personality of the pair and who had succeeded as Principal of St. Hugh's, became convinced that a German spy was hiding in the college.[24] After developing increasingly autocratic behaviour, she died suddenly in 1924 in the middle of an academic scandal over her leadership of the college, her conduct having provoked mass resignations of academic staff.[25] Moberly died in 1937.

The story of the adventure was made into a TV movie, Miss Morison's Ghosts, in 1981.[26] The BBC broadcast a 90-minute radio dramatization in 2004 and 2015'[27]

Some explanations[edit]

In addition to the explanation by the women that they had been caught up in what is now called a time slip and had observed ghosts from the past, a non-supernatural explanation of the events was proposed by Philippe Jullian in his 1965 biography of the aristocratic decadent French poet Robert de Montesquiou.[28] At the time of Moberly and Jourdain's excursion to Versailles, Montesquiou lived nearby, and reportedly gave parties in the grounds where his friends dressed in period costume and performed tableaux vivants as part of the party entertainments. Moberly and Jourdain may have inadvertently gatecrashed a gay fancy dress party. The Marie-Antoinette figure could have been a society lady or a cross-dresser, the pockmarked man Montesquiou himself. It was suggested that a gathering of the French decadent avant-garde of the time could have made a sinister impression on the two middle-class Edwardian spinsters who would have been little used to such company.[29]

In a review of the history of the Moberly-Jourdain adventure and the extensive public reaction to it Terry Castle noted with skepticism the claim that a shared delusion may have arisen out of a lesbian folie à deux between the two women.[30] Castle concludes that, when all proposed explanations have been considered, a core of mystery remains as much in relation to the psychological dynamics of the pair as to any aspects of the paranormal associated with their story.

Without fully endorsing the de Montesquiou explanation, Michael Coleman carefully examined the story, and in particular the two published versions of the ladies' accounts (the earlier-written of which, from November 1901, had only previously been published in the second, small print-run, edition of An Adventure in 1913), and concluded that the more widely available texts, as published in the 1911 and later editions, had been considerably embroidered well after the events described and after the ladies had begun their investigations, while the original accounts had little or nothing to suggest a supernatural experience. He also questioned the rigour and reliability of the ladies' subsequent researches, pointing out that few, if any, of their informants are named and that most of their literary and historical references were taken from unreliable sources.[31]

Brian Dunning of Skeptoid researched much of the evidence and concluded that "Moberly and Jourdain were simply human" and were mistaken. He notes that in the second edition of An Adventure it is revealed that Moberly did not mention the sketching woman until three months after their visit to Versailles, and at that time Jourdain did not remember such a thing. And that Moberly did not remember much of what Jourdain did either. "It was only after much discussion, note-sharing, and historical research that Moberly and Jourdain came up with the time period as 1789 and assigned identities to a few of the characters they saw, including Marie Antoinette herself as the lady sketching on the lawn."[32]

Dame Joan Evans, who owned the copyright to 'An Adventure,' accepted the Jullian explanation and forbade any further editions, however, it was republished in 1988 as "The Ghosts of Trianon: The Complete 'An Adventure'" by Thoth Publication and again in 2008 by CreateSpace, both times crediting Moberly and Jourdain as the authors.

See also[edit]

  1. ^ The review is reprinted in Iremonger 1975, pp. 146–155.

  1. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 27.
  2. ^ Deuchar 2004.
  3. ^ Harrison & Harrison 1869, p. 4637.
  4. ^ Quare 2007.
  5. ^ a b c d e Farson 1978, p. 18.
  6. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 64.
  7. ^ O'Connor & Robertson 2005.
  8. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 80.
  9. ^ a b Iremonger 1975, p. 127.
  10. ^ a b c Iremonger 1975, p. 128.
  11. ^ Iremonger 1975, pp. 128–129.
  12. ^ qtd. in Castle 1995, p. 193.
  13. ^ qtd. in Castle 1995, p. 194.
  14. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 129.
  15. ^ a b Moberly & Jourdain 1989, p. ?.
  16. ^ Farson 1978, p. 20.
  17. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 130.
  18. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 181.
  19. ^ a b c Farson 1978, p. 22.
  20. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 131.
  21. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 197.
  22. ^ Iremonger 1975, pp. 41, 97–103.
  23. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 42.
  24. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 92.
  25. ^ Iremonger 1975, p. 105.
  26. ^ cf. Miss Morison's Ghosts at the Internet Movie Database
  27. ^
  28. ^ Jullian 1967, pp. 140-141.
  29. ^ Evans 1976, pp. 33–47.
  30. ^ Castle 1991, pp. 741–772.
  31. ^ Coleman, M. H. (Ed.) The Ghosts of the Trianon. Aquarian Press, Wellingborough 1988
  32. ^ Dunning, Brian. "Skeptoid #296, The Versailles Time Slip". Skeptoid. Retrieved 11 August 2012.

Coordinates: 48°48′57″N 2°06′35″E / 48.8158°N 2.1097°E / 48.8158; 2.1097


text:
Pelados em Santos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"Pelados em Santos"
Single by Mamonas Assassinas
from the album Mamonas Assassinas
Released August, 1995
Recorded 1995
Genre Comedy rock, hard rock, heavy metal, mexican music
Length 3:23
Label EMI
Writer(s) Dinho
Producer(s) Rick Bonadio
Mamonas Assassinas singles chronology
"Pelados em Santos"
"Robocop Gay"
The Volkswagen Brasilia was a prominent feature of the original Mamonas Assassinas' clip.

"Pelados em Santos" is a song written by Alecsander Alves (best known by the nickname Dinho), and performed by the Brazilian comedy rock band Mamonas Assassinas. The song was released in 1996, in their only album Mamonas Assassinas. The song enjoyed fame in Brazil and other countries in Latin America. The song was released by EMI.

Cover versions[edit]

"Pelados em Santos"
Single by Titãs
from the album As Dez Mais
Released 1999
Label WEA
Titãs singles chronology
É Preciso Saber Viver
Pelados em Santos

The Brazilian rock group Titãs covered this song in 1999, in their cover album As Dez Mais.

Music video[edit]

The music video of the song shows each member of the band offering a wide range of fictional products of the brand "Titãs" (like banks, whiskeys, food, etc.) in a Bombril commercials-like studio (actually, the PV was introduced by the same man that made the Bombril TV commercials), with alternate shots of naked women holding the As Dez Mais CD.

In the middle of the video, a brand of giant cigarettes ("Titãs lights") is introduced by the Bombril man, and a warning on the upper left edge says: "Os Titãs advertem: O ministério faz mal a sua saúde" (Titãs warn: the Ministry is unhealthy for you), a parody of the similar warning placed in all cigarettes' packs in Brazil, as well on cigarette advertisings in television: "O Ministério da Saúde adverte: fumar é prejudicial à saúde" (The Ministry of Health warns: smoking is unhealthy).

Other notable shots include Tony Bellotto pretending sex with a sex doll, some band members hugged with the naked women and the final shot of the clip, with all the band members and the Bombril man singing the song.


text:
Say's law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Say's law, or the law of markets, found in classical economics, states that aggregate production necessarily creates an equal quantity of aggregate demand. It was stated by the French economist Jean-Baptiste Say (1767–1832), who wrote in 1803 in Say's principal work, A Treatise on Political Economy (Traité d'économie politique):

A product is no sooner created, than it, from that instant, affords a market for other products to the full extent of its own value.[1]

As each of us can only purchase the productions of others with his own productions – as the value we can buy is equal to the value we can produce, the more men can produce, the more they will purchase.[2]

Say further argued that the law of markets implies that a "general glut" (the term used in Say's time for a widespread excess of supply over demand) cannot occur. If there is a surplus of one good, there must be unmet demand for another: "If certain goods remain unsold, it is because other goods are not produced." [2] Say's law has been one of the principal doctrines used to support the laissez-faire belief that a capitalist economy will naturally tend toward full employment and prosperity without government intervention.[3][4]

Over the years, at least two objections to Say's law have been raised:

  • General gluts do in fact occur, particularly during recessions and depressions.
  • Economic agents may collectively choose to increase the amount of money they hold, thereby reducing demand but not supply.

Say's law was generally accepted throughout the 19th century, though modified to incorporate the idea of a "boom-and-bust" cycle. During the worldwide Great Depression of the 1930s, the novel theories of Keynesian economics disputed Say's conclusions. The debate between classical and Keynesian economics continues today.[5]

Scholars disagree on the surprisingly subtle question of whether it was Say who first stated the principle,[6][7] but by convention, "Say's law" has been another name for the law of markets ever since John Maynard Keynes used the term in the 1930s.

History of Say's law[edit]

Say's formulation[edit]

Say argued that economic agents offer goods and services for sale so that they can spend the money they expect to obtain. Therefore, the fact that a quantity of goods and services is offered for sale is evidence of an equal quantity of demand. This claim is often summarized as "Supply creates its own demand", although that phrase does not appear in Say's writings.

Explaining his point at length, he wrote:

It is worthwhile to remark that a product is no sooner created than it, from that instant, affords a market for other products to the full extent of its own value. When the producer has put the finishing hand to his product, he is most anxious to sell it immediately, lest its value should diminish in his hands. Nor is he less anxious to dispose of the money he may get for it; for the value of money is also perishable. But the only way of getting rid of money is in the purchase of some product or other. Thus the mere circumstance of creation of one product immediately opens a vent for other products.[8]

Say further argued that because production necessarily creates demand, a "general glut" of unsold goods of all kinds is impossible. If there is an excess supply of one good, there must be a shortage of another: "The superabundance of goods of one description arises from the deficiency of goods of another description."[9]

Say rejected the possibility that money obtained from the sale of goods could remain unspent, thereby reducing demand below supply. He viewed money only as a temporary medium of exchange.

Money performs but a momentary function in this double exchange; and when the transaction is finally closed, it will always be found, that one kind of commodity has been exchanged for another.[10]

Early opinions[edit]

Early writers on political economy held a variety of opinions on what we now call Say’s law. James Mill and David Ricardo both supported the law in full. Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill questioned the doctrine that general gluts cannot occur.

James Mill and David Ricardo restated and developed Say's law. Mill wrote, "The production of commodities creates, and is the one and universal cause which creates, a market for the commodities produced."[11] Ricardo wrote, "Demand depends only on supply."[12]

Thomas Malthus, on the other hand, rejected Say’s law because he saw evidence of general gluts.

We hear of glutted markets, falling prices, and cotton goods selling at Kamschatka lower than the costs of production. It may be said, perhaps, that the cotton trade happens to be glutted; and it is a tenet of the new doctrine on profits and demand, that if one trade be overstocked with capital, it is a certain sign that some other trade is understocked. But where, I would ask, is there any considerable trade that is confessedly under-stocked, and where high profits have been long pleading in vain for additional capital?[13]

John Stuart Mill also recognized general gluts. He argued that during a general glut, there is insufficient demand for all non-monetary commodities and excess demand for money.

When there is a general anxiety to sell, and a general disinclination to buy, commodities of all kinds remain for a long time unsold, and those which find an immediate market, do so at a very low price... At periods such as we have described... persons in general... liked better to possess money than any other commodity. Money, consequently, was in request, and all other commodities were in comparative disrepute... As there may be a temporary excess of any one article considered separately, so may there of commodities generally, not in consequence of over-production, but of a want of commercial confidence.[14]

Mill rescued the claim that there cannot be a simultaneous glut of all commodities by including money as one of the commodities.

In order to render the argument for the impossibility of an excess of all commodities applicable... money must itself be considered as a commodity. It must, undoubtedly, be admitted that there cannot be an excess of all other commodities, and an excess of money at the same time.[15]

Contemporary economist Brad DeLong considers that Mill’s argument refutes the assertions that a general glut cannot occur, and that a market economy naturally tends towards an equilibrium in which general gluts do not occur.[16][17] What remains of Say's law, after Mill's modification, are a few less controversial assertions:

  • In the long run, the ability to produce does not outstrip the desire to consume.
  • In a barter economy, a general glut cannot occur.
  • In a monetary economy, a general glut occurs not because sellers produce more commodities of every kind than buyers wish to purchase, but because buyers increase their desire to hold money.[18]

Say himself never used many of the later, short definitions of Say's law, and thus the law actually developed through the work of many of his contemporaries and successors. The work of James Mill, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, and others evolved Say's law into what is sometimes called "law of markets", which was a key element of the framework of macroeconomics from the mid-19th century until the 1930s.

Say's law and the Great Depression[edit]

The Great Depression posed a challenge to Say's law. In the United States, unemployment rose to 25%.[19] The quarter of the labor force that was unemployed constituted a supply of labor for which the demand predicted by Say's law did not exist.

John Maynard Keynes argued in 1936 that Say's law is simply not true, and that demand, rather than supply, is the key variable that determines the overall level of economic activity. According to Keynes, demand depends on the propensity of individuals to consume and on the propensity of businesses to invest, both of which vary throughout the business cycle. There is no reason to expect enough aggregate demand to produce full employment.[20]

Say's law today[edit]

Today, most mainstream economists reject Say's law. Steven Kates, although a proponent of Say's Law, writes:

Before the Keynesian Revolution, denial of the validity of Say's Law placed an economist amongst the crackpots, people with no idea whatsoever about how an economy works. That the vast majority of the economics profession today would have been classified as crackpots in the 1930s and before is just how it is. [21]

However, some proponents of the heterodox Austrian school of economics maintain that the economy tends to full-employment equilibrium, and that recessions and depressions are the result of government intervention in the economy. [22] Some proponents of real business cycle theory maintain that high unemployment is due to a reduced labor supply rather than reduced demand. In other words, people choose to work less when economic conditions are poor, so that involuntary unemployment does not actually exist. [23] [24]

Furthermore, some politicians today believe Say's law. For example, French President François Hollande declared, "Supply actually creates demand." [25]

A number of laissez-faire consequences have been drawn from interpretations of Say's law. However, Say himself advocated public works to remedy unemployment and criticized Ricardo for neglecting the possibility of hoarding if there was a lack of investment opportunities.[26]

Recession and unemployment[edit]

Say argued against claims that businesses suffer because people do not have enough money. He argued that the power to purchase can only be increased through more production.

James Mill used Say's law against those who sought to give the economy a boost via unproductive consumption. In his view, consumption destroys wealth, in contrast to production, which is the source of economic growth. The demand for a product determines the price of the product.

According to Keynes (see more below), if Say's law is correct, widespread involuntary unemployment (caused by inadequate demand) cannot occur. Classical economists in the context of Say's law explain unemployment as arising from insufficient demand for specialized labour—that is, the supply of viable labour exceeds demand in some segments of the economy.

When more goods are produced by firms than are demanded in certain sectors, the suppliers in those sectors lose revenue as result. This loss of revenue, which would in turn have been used to purchase other goods from other firms, lowers demand for the products of firms in other sectors, causing an overall general reduction in output and thus lowering the demand for labour. This results in what contemporary macroeconomics call structural unemployment, the presumed mismatch between the overall demand for labour in jobs offered and the individual job skills and location of labour. This differs from the Keynesian concept of cyclical unemployment, which is presumed to arise because of inadequate aggregate demand.

Such economic losses and unemployment were seen by some economists, such as Marx and Keynes himself, as an intrinsic property of the capitalist system. The division of labor leads to a situation where one always has to anticipate what others will be willing to buy, and this leads to miscalculations. However, this theory alone does not explain the existence of cyclical phenomena in the economy, because such miscalculations would happen with constant frequency, and to such a large scale that thousands of businesses in multiple sectors would simultaneously miscalculate (as during an economic bubble).[according to whom?]

Assumptions and criticisms[edit]

Say's law did not posit that (as per the Keynesian formulation) "supply creates its own demand".[27] Nor was it based on the idea that everything that is saved will be exchanged. Rather, Say sought to refute the idea that production and employment were limited by low consumption.[27]

Thus Say's law, in its original concept, was not intrinsically linked nor logically reliant on the neutrality of money (as has been alleged by those who wish to disagree with it[28]), because the key proposition of the law is that no matter how much people save, production is still a possibility, as it is the prerequisite for the attainment of any additional consumption goods. Say's law states that in a market economy, goods and services are produced for exchange with other goods and services—"employment multipliers" therefore arise from production and not exchange alone—and that in the process a sufficient level of real income is created to purchase the economy's entire output, due to the truism that the means of consumption are limited ex vi termini by the level of production. That is, with regard to the exchange of products within a division of labour, the total supply of goods and services in a market economy will equal the total demand derived from consumption during any given time period. In modern terms, "general gluts cannot exist",[29] although there may be local imbalances, with gluts in some markets balanced out by shortages in others.

Nevertheless, for some neoclassical economists,[30] Say's law implies that economy is always at its full employment level. This is not necessarily what Say proposed.

In the Keynesian interpretation,[30] the assumptions of Say's law are:

  • a barter model of money ("products are paid for with products");
  • flexible prices—that is, all prices can rapidly adjust upwards or downwards; and
  • no government intervention.

Under these assumptions, Say's law implies that there cannot be a general glut, so that a persistent state cannot exist in which demand is generally less than productive capacity and high unemployment results. Keynesians therefore argued[who?][when?] that the Great Depression demonstrated that Say's law is incorrect. Keynes, in his General Theory, argued that a country could go into a recession because of "lack of aggregate demand".[citation needed]

Because historically there have been many persistent economic crises, one may reject one or more of the assumptions of Say's law, its reasoning, or its conclusions. Taking the assumptions in turn:

  • Circuitists and some post-Keynesians dispute the barter model of money, arguing that money is fundamentally different from commodities and that credit bubbles can and do cause depressions. Notably, the debt owed does not change because the economy has changed.
  • Keynes argued that prices are not flexible; for example, workers may not take pay cuts if the result is starvation.[citation needed]
  • Laissez-faire economists[who?] argue that government intervention is the cause of economic crises, and that left to its devices, the market will adjust efficiently.

As for the implication that dislocations cannot cause persistent unemployment, some theories of economic cycles accept Say's law and seek to explain high unemployment in other ways, considering depressed demand for labour as a form of local dislocation. For example, advocates of Real Business Cycle Theory[citation needed] argue that real shocks cause recessions and that the market responds efficiently to these real economic shocks.

Paul Krugman dismisses Say's law as, "at best, a useless tautology when individuals have the option of accumulating money rather than purchasing real goods and services."[31]

Role of money[edit]

It is not easy to say what exactly Say's law says about the role of money apart from the claim that recession is not caused by lack of money. The phrase "products are paid for with products" is taken to mean that Say has a barter model of money; contrast with circuitist and post-Keynesian monetary theory.

One can read Say as stating simply that money is completely neutral, although he did not state this explicitly, and in fact did not concern himself with this subject. Say's central notion concerning money was that if one has money, it is irrational to hoard it.[citation needed]

The assumption that hoarding is irrational was attacked by underconsumptionist economists, such as John M. Robertson, in his 1892 book, The Fallacy of Saving,[32][33] where he called Say's law:

a tenacious fallacy, consequent on the inveterate evasion of the plain fact that men want for their goods, not merely some other goods to consume, but further, some credit or abstract claim to future wealth, goods, or services. This all want as a surplus or bonus, and this surplus cannot be represented for all in present goods.

—John M. Robertson, The Fallacy of Saving, p. 98

Here Robertson identifies his critique as based on Say's theory of money: people wish to accumulate a "claim to future wealth", not simply present goods, and thus the hoarding of wealth may be rational.

For Say, as for other classical economists, it is quite possible for there to be a glut (excess supply, market surplus) for one product alongside a shortage (excess demand) of others. But there is no "general glut" in Say's view, since the gluts and shortages cancel out for the economy as a whole. But what if the excess demand is for money, because people are hoarding it? This creates an excess supply for all products, a general glut. Say's answer is simple: there is no reason to engage in hoarding money. According to Say, the only reason to have money is to buy products. It would not be a mistake, in his view, to treat the economy as if it were a barter economy. To quote Say:

Nor is [an individual] less anxious to dispose of the money he may get ... But the only way of getting rid of money is in the purchase of some product or other.[34]

An alternative modern view[by whom?] that gives an equivalent result is that all money that is held is done so in financial institutions (markets), so that any increase in the holding of money increases the supply of loanable funds. Then, with full adjustment of interest rates, the increased supply of loanable funds leads to an increase in borrowing and spending. Consequently, any negative effects on demand that results from the holding of money are canceled out, and Say's law still applies.

In Keynesian terms, followers of Say's law would argue that on the aggregate level, there is only a transactions demand for money. That is, there is no precautionary, finance, or speculative demand for money. Money is held for spending, and increases in money supplies lead to increased spending.

Some classical economists did see that a loss of confidence in business or a collapse of credit will increase the demand for money, which will decrease the demand for goods. This view was expressed both by Robert Torrens[citation needed] and John Stuart Mill.[citation needed] This would lead demand and supply to move out of phase and lead to an economic downturn in the same way that miscalculation in productions would, as described by William H. Beveridge in 1909.

However, in classical economics, there was no reason for such a collapse to persist. In this view, persistent depressions, such as that of the 1930s, are impossible in a free market organized according to laissez-faire principles. The flexibility of markets under laissez faire allows prices, wages, and interest rates to adjust so as to abolish all excess supplies and demands; however, since all economies are a mixture of regulation and free-market elements, laissez-faire principles (which require a free market environment) cannot adjust effectively to excess supply and demand.

Say's law as a theoretical point of departure[edit]

The whole of neoclassical equilibrium analysis implies that Say's law in the first place functioned to bring a market into this state: that is, Say's law is the mechanism through which markets equilibrate uniquely. Equilibrium analysis and its derivatives of optimization and efficiency in exchange live or die with Say's law. This is one of the major, fundamental points of contention between the neoclassical tradition, Keynes, and Marxians. Ultimately, from Say's law they deduced vastly different conclusions regarding the functioning of capitalist production.

The former, not to be confused with "new Keynesian" and the many offsprings and syntheses of the "General Theory", take the fact that a commodity–commodity economy is substantially altered once it becomes a commodity–money–commodity economy, or once money becomes not only a facilitator of exchange (its only function in marginalist theory) but also a store of value and a means of payment. What this means is that money can be (and must be) hoarded: it may not re-enter the circulatory process for some time, and thus a general glut is not only possible but, to the extent that money is not rapidly turned over, probable.

A response to this in defense of Say's law (echoing the debates between Ricardo and Malthus, in which the former denied the possibility of a general glut on its grounds) is that consumption that is abstained from through hoarding is simply transferred to a different consumer—overwhelmingly to factor (investment) markets, which, through financial institutions, function through the rate of interest.

Keynes' innovation in this regard was twofold: First, he was to turn the mechanism that regulates savings and investment, the rate of interest, into a shell of its former self (relegating it to the price of money) by showing that supply and investment were not independent of one another and thus could not be related uniquely in terms of the balancing of disutility and utility. Second, after Say's law was dealt with and shown to be theoretically inconsistent, there was a gap to be filled. If Say's law was the logic by which we thought financial markets came to a unique position in the long run, and if Say's law were to be discarded, what were the real "rules of the game" of the financial markets? How did they function and remain stable?

To this Keynes responded with his famous notion of "Animal Spirits": markets were ruled by speculative behavior, influenced not only by one's own personal equation but also by one's perceptions of the speculative behavior of others. In turn, others' behavior was motivated by their perceptions of others' behavior, and so on. Without Say's law keeping them in balance, financial markets were thus inherently unstable. Through this identification, Keynes deduced the consequences of the macroeconomy of long-run equilibrium being attained not at only one unique position that represented a "Pareto Optima" (a special case), but through a possible range of many equilibria that could significantly under-employ human and natural resources (the general case).

For the Marxian critique, which is more fundamental, one must start at Marx's initial distinction between use value and exchange value, use value being the use somebody has for a commodity, and exchange value being what an item is traded for on a market. In Marx's theory, there is a gap between the creation of surplus value in production and the realization of that surplus value via a sale. To realize a sale, a commodity must have a use value for someone, in order for them to purchase the commodity and complete the cycle M–C–M'. Capitalism, which is purely interested in value (money as wealth), must create use value. The capitalist has no control over whether or not the value contained in the product is realized through the market mechanism. This gap between production and realization creates the possibility for capitalist crisis. As the realization of capital is only possible through a market, Marx criticized other economists, such as David Ricardo, who argued that capital is realized via production. Thus, in Marx's theory, there can be general overproductive crises within capitalism.[35]

Given these concepts and their implications, Say's law does not hold in the Marxian framework. Moreover, the theoretical core of the Marxian framework contrasts with that of the neoclassical and Austrian traditions.

Conceptually, the distinction between Keynes and Marx is that for Keynes the theory is but a special case of his general theory, whereas for Marx it never existed at all.

Modern interpretations[edit]

A modern way of expressing Say's law is that there can never be a general glut. Instead of there being an excess supply (glut or surplus) of goods in general, there may be an excess supply of one or more goods, but only when balanced by an excess demand (shortage) of yet other goods. Thus, there may be a glut of labor ("cyclical" unemployment), but this is balanced by an excess demand for produced goods. Modern advocates of Say's law see market forces as working quickly, via price adjustments, to abolish both gluts and shortages. The exception is when governments or other non-market forces prevent price adjustments.

According to Keynes, the implication of Say's law is that a free-market economy is always at what Keynesian economists call full employment (see also Walras' law). Thus, Say's law is part of the general world view of laissez-faire economics—that is, that free markets can solve the economy's problems automatically. (These problems are recessions, stagnation, depression, and involuntary unemployment.)

Some proponents of Say's law argue that such intervention is always counterproductive. Consider Keynesian-type policies aimed at stimulating the economy. Increased government purchases of goods (or lowered taxes) merely "crowd out" the production and purchase of goods by the private sector. Contradicting this view, Arthur Cecil Pigou, a self-proclaimed follower of Say's law, wrote a letter in 1932 signed by five other economists (among them Keynes) calling for more public spending to alleviate high levels of unemployment.

Keynes versus Say[edit]

For more details on this topic, see Supply creates its own demand.

Keynes summarized Say's law as "supply creates its own demand", or the assumption "that the whole of the costs of production must necessarily be spent in the aggregate, directly or indirectly, on purchasing the product" (from chapter 2 of his General Theory).

Keynesian economists, such as Paul Krugman, stress the role of money in negating Say's law: Money that is hoarded (held as cash or analogous financial instruments) is not spent on products. To increase monetary holdings, someone may sell products or labor without immediately spending the proceeds. This can be a general phenomenon: from time to time, in response to changing economic circumstances, households and businesses in aggregate seek to increase net savings and thus decrease net debt. To increase net savings requires earning more than is spent—contrary to Say's law, which postulates that supply (sales, earning income) equals demand (purchases, requiring spending). Keynesian economists argue that the failure of Say's law, through an increased demand for monetary holdings, can result in a general glut due to falling demand for goods and services.

This provides an explanation for recessionary spirals and economic depressions. Without sufficient demand for the products of labor, the availability of jobs will be low; without enough jobs, working people will receive inadequate income, implying insufficient demand for products. Thus, an aggregate demand failure involves a vicious circle: if a worker supplies more labor time (in order to buy more goods), he or she may be frustrated because no one is hiring—that is, because there is no increase in the demand for the worker's products until after he or she gets a job and earns an income. (Of course, most employees get paid after working, after some of the product is sold.) Further, unlike the Say's law story above, there are interactions between different markets (and their gluts and shortages) that go beyond the simple price mechanism, to limit the quantity of jobs supplied and the quantity of products demanded.

Some classical economists[who?] suggested that hoarding (increases in money-equivalent holdings) would always be balanced by dis-hoarding. This requires equality of saving (abstention from purchase of goods) and investment (the purchase of capital goods). However, Keynes and others argued that hoarding decisions are made by different people and for different reasons than are decisions to dis-hoard, so that hoarding and dis-hoarding are unlikely to be equal at all times, as indeed they are not. Decreasing demand (consumption) does not necessarily stimulate capital spending (investment).

Some[who?] have argued that financial markets, and especially interest rates, could adjust to keep hoarding and dis-hoarding equal, so that Say's law could be maintained, or that prices could simply fall, to prevent a decrease in production. (See the discussion of "excess saving" under "Keynesian economics".) But Keynes argued that in order to play this role, interest rates would have to fall rapidly and that there were limits on how quickly and how low they could fall (as in the liquidity trap, where interest rates approach zero and cannot fall further). To Keynes, in the short run, interest rates were determined more by the supply and demand for money than by saving and investment. Before interest rates could adjust sufficiently, excessive hoarding would cause the vicious circle of falling aggregate production (recession). The recession itself would lower incomes so that hoarding (and saving) and dis-hoarding (and real investment) could reach a state of balance below full employment.

Worse, a recession would hurt private real investment—by hurting profitability and business confidence—through what is called the accelerator effect. This means that the balance between hoarding and dis-hoarding would be pushed even further below the full-employment level of production.

Keynesians[citation needed] argue that this kind of vicious circle can be broken by stimulating the aggregate demand for products using various macroeconomic policies mentioned in the introduction above, making Say's law true in practice when it is false in theory [1]. Increases in the demand for products lead to increased supply (production) and an increased availability of jobs, and thus to further increases in demand and in production. This cumulative causation is called the multiplier process.

See also[edit]

  1. ^ Say 1834, p. 138
  2. ^ a b Say 1834, p. 3
  3. ^ Foley, Duncan (2008). Adam's Fallacy: A Guide to Economic Theology. Harvard University Press. pp. 184.
  4. ^ Tyler Cowen, Say's Law and Keynesian Economics, in Wood, John Cunningham (editor); Kates, Steven (editor) (2000). Jean-Baptiste Say: Critical Assessments of Leading Economists V. London: Routledge. pp. 305.
  5. ^ John Kenneth Galbraith, Economics in Perspective, pp. 74–77, Houghton Mifflin, 1987, ISBN 0-395-48346-8
  6. ^ William O. Thweatt, Early Formulators of Say's Law, in Wood, John Cunningham (editor); Kates, Steven (editor) (2000). Jean-Baptiste Say: Critical Assessments of Leading Economists V. London: Routledge. pp. 78–93.
  7. ^ Braudel, The Wheels of Commerce: Civilisation and Capitalism 15th–18th Century, 1979:181
  8. ^ Say 1834, pp. 138–139
  9. ^ Say 1821, p. 5
  10. ^ Say 1834, p. 138
  11. ^ James Mill, Commerce Defended (1808), Chapter VI: Consumption, p. 81
  12. ^ Ricardo, David (1971). The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Vol. II. Notes on Malthus's Principles of Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 365.
  13. ^ Malthus, Thomas (1820). Principles of Political Economy Considered With a View to Their Practical Application. London: John Murray. pp. 333–334.
  14. ^ Mill 1844, pp. 70–74
  15. ^ Mill 1844, p. 71
  16. ^ DeLong, Brad (6 August 2012). "Why History of Economic Thought is Important". Retrieved 31 July 2014.
  17. ^ DeLong, Brad (28 June 2010). "Is Macroeconomics Hard?". Retrieved 31 July 2014.
  18. ^ Mill 1844, pp. 69–74
  19. ^ Frank, Robert H.; Bernanke, Ben S. (2007). Principles of Macroeconomics (3rd ed.). p. 98. ISBN 0-07-319397-6.
  20. ^ Keynes, John Maynard. "The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money" (PDF). pp. 25–26. Retrieved 12 November 2014.
  21. ^ Kates, Steven (25 April 2013). "Debts, deficits and slow growth". Retrieved 12 November 2014.
  22. ^ Manier, Damien (11 October 2011). "Keynesian v Austrian View of the Business Cycle". Retrieved 13 November 2014.
  23. ^ Krugman, Paul (17 February 2014). "The Trouble With Being Abstruse (Slightly Wonkish)". Retrieved 13 November 2014.
  24. ^ Lucas, Robert E. (May 1978), American Economic Review 68 (2): 353–357  Missing or empty |title= (help); |chapter= ignored (help)
  25. ^ Saraceno, Francesco (15 January 2014). "Jean-Baptiste Hollande". Retrieved 12 November 2014.
  26. ^ Warren J. Samuels, Jeff Biddle, John Bryan Davis, A companion to the history of economic thought, p. 326.
  27. ^ a b Horwitz, Steve. "Understanding Say's Law of Markets". The Freeman. Foundation for Economic Education. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
  28. ^ Watson, Garrett. "Guest post: Misunderstanding Say’s Law of Markets (Garrett Watson)". The Market Monetarist. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
  29. ^ Fonseca, Gonçalo L. "The General Glut Controversy". The New School. Retrieved 14 July 2010.
  30. ^ a b Martin, Adam (2004). Keynes and Say’s Law of Markets: Analysis and Implications for Austrian Economics (PDF). p. 3.
  31. ^ "Introduction by Paul Krugman to The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money, by John Maynard Keynes". Retrieved 11 April 2014.
  32. ^ Robertson, John M. (1892). The Fallacy of Saving.
  33. ^ Nash, Robert T.; Gramm, William P. (1969). "A Neglected Early Statement the Paradox of Thrift". History of Political Economy 1 (2): 395–400. doi:10.1215/00182702-1-2-395.
  34. ^ "Information on Jean-Baptiste Say". Retrieved 2012-05-26.
  35. ^ Karl Marx, Grundrisse,

Further reading[edit]

  • Ackley, Gardner (1961). "Say's Law and the Quantity Theory of Money". Macroeconomic Theory. New York: Macmillan. pp. 105–123.
  • Axel Leijonhufvud, 1968. On Keynesian Economics & the Economics of Keynes: A Study in Monetary Theory. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-500948-7.
  • Kates, Steven (1998). Say's Law and the Keynesian revolution: how macroeconomic theory lost its way. Edward Elgard Publishing Limited. ISBN 1-85898-748-2.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1977). "Say's (at Least) Eight Laws, or What Say and James Mill May Really Have Meant". Economica (Blackwell Publishing) 44 (174): 145–161. doi:10.2307/2553717. JSTOR 2553717.  edit

External links[edit]