Topics

A stack o' pennies
The Associated Press

Poor, pitiful penny.

Featured Topic | Posted 40 weeks 2 days ago

Is it time for the penny to go?

Who doesn't care about money? A piece in The New Yorker calling for the end of the penny in America stirred bloggers and presidential candidates alike. The New Yorker article received hundreds of votes and comments on Digg, the social news site, based almost solely on a headline emphasizing one of its more convincing pieces of trivia: “A Penny Costs 1.7 Cents to Produce.”

Read More

Ben likes: Affirmative action for the penny

James Poulos/The American Scene

The penny is obsolete and inefficient, or so they say. What is to be done? Junking the penny has its merits. The clear solution derived from these key points is not to eliminate the penny but to kill of the nickel and make pennies worth five cents. The nickel is a misshapen fraud with a beastly portrait of a godless slaveowner. The penny is a pure classic that bears around the world billions of images of the Great Emancipator in all his Christian mercy, from the filthiest whorehouse to the bedsides of tykes.

After all the work it’s done for us, now it’s our turn to give the penny a leg up. Ditch the nickel. Promote the penny to five-cent status. 

Read More

Joel likes: Penny dreadful

David Owen/The New Yorker

A modern penny simply isn’t worth enough to worry about. In 1940, an average one-pound loaf of bread sold for eight cents, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That means that a penny in those days bought enough bread to make a good-sized sandwich. These days, a penny doesn’t buy much more than a bit of crust.

Accurately comparing monetary values (and bread loaves) across decades is impossible, but by almost any economic measure a 1940 penny had more purchasing power than a modern quarter does; in 1940, then, consumers got by, quite contentedly, without the equivalent of our penny, nickel, or dime. And many people continue to get by without these coins today, since in the actual marketplace consumers tend to treat the quarter as the smallest meaningful denomination.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
Money
Flickr user Tracy O

Makes the political world go 'round.

Featured Topic | Posted 41 weeks 1 day ago

Is big money in politics a sign of excess?

With eight months to go before the U.S. presidential election, the candidates have raised almost $1 billion to fund their campaigns -- more than the size of the economies of several African countries. The unusually long race for the White House -- which began in earnest more than a year ago -- has been a cash bonanza, especially for Democrats who are breaking all records.

Read More

Ben likes: More money, no problem

David Weigel/Reason

Taking the money out of campaigns is supposed to clean up politics; the fact that 2008 might become the first $1 billon presidential campaign is considered a sign of a broken democracy. In late February former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack dropped out of the Democrats' race and made a glum tour of the pundit circuit, bemoaning how he had to end his quest for a promotion because he couldn't raise money. The implication: An unassuming Midwestern politician who was polling third or fourth in his own state, long before any TV ads started running, deserved as much money as Hillary Clinton. And if taxpayers had to provide that money, so be it.

This is, to put it bluntly, sour grapes. Another governor from a small state, Vermont's Howard Dean, surged far ahead of his 2004 rivals in fund raising simply because the threshold for donations had gone up and the Internet made it inexpensive-almost free, compared to the costs of direct mail or fundraisers-to reach out to donors.

Read More

Joel likes: Making elections fair

Ari Berman/The Nation

Illinois's senior Senator, Dick Durbin--the number-two Democrat in the Senate--has introduced the first bipartisan bill to publicly finance federal races, modeled after successful "clean election" laws at the state and local levels. Durbin's bill won't stop the presidential money chase. But it would transform the way Congressional races are fought and won, laying down the most significant campaign finance reforms to date. Obama has signed on as a co-sponsor, calling the bill "a very intelligent approach."

The proposal is quite simple: If Congressional candidates raise enough $5 donations to prove they are viable and competitive (that number is 11,500 in Durbin's home state, according to a formula in the bill), they can qualify for public funds in the primary and general election. The need to spend hours cold-calling rich donors and shmoozing with lobbyists and CEOs at closed-door fundraisers would drastically diminish. Durbin knows this world well. As a top Democrat, he has to collect money for his colleagues as well as for his own re-election race in '08. "I can't tell you how much time we spend fundraising," he says. "People would be surprised, if not shocked," if they knew.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
The Associated Press

His children will still get a nice inheritance.

Featured Topic | Posted 48 weeks 6 days ago

The $35 million man: Can Romney's money buy him a shot at the presidency?

Running for president doesn't come cheap, but usually candidates are spending other people's money. Not Mitt Romney: New campaign finance reports show that he has spent $35 million of his $250 million fortune on the campaign -- but still appears to be losing the momentum battle to John McCain.

Can the presidency be bought?

Read More

Ben likes: Self-funding in an age of BCRA

Ed Morrisey/Captain's Quarters

Late last night, Mitt Romney's campaign released its fourth-quarter funding figures, and as everyone expected, Romney significantly self-funded. He raised $9 million, which stacks up well against the other Republicans, but added twice as much into the kitty from his own pocket.

This release occasioned an e-mail missive from Team McCain calling this "alarming", and that he was "wasting his fortune". Perhaps, but it is his fortune to waste -- and given his track record, he's probably not going to have much problem recovering it if he returns to the private sector now or a few years in the future. Whether a run for the Presidency is a "waste" really is Romney's call, and no one else's. After all, it's his money.

Read More

Joel likes:In White House race, can voters avoid the rich list?

Ian Munro/The Age (Australia)

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee stands out from other candidates for the Republican presidential nomination for reasons apart from his Christian social conservatism. How many reasons? Somewhere between 190 million and 250 million. That is the dollar amount by which his personal wealth is estimated to trail that of Mitt Romney.

The key to wealth and politics, however, may be less about presidential hopefuls' actual worth and more about whom their wealth enables them to reach out to for campaign funds.

"All of these candidates, because they are in this bubble running for president, are detached to some extent from the lives of Americans," Massie Ritsch said. "But those who are personally wealthy, it's reasonable to wonder if they are even more removed."

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote
The Associated Press

She makes the world go 'round?

Featured Topic | Posted 50 weeks 1 day ago

Celebrity stimulus: Is Britney Spears good for the economy?

To the casual tabloid reader, Britney Spears' life looks like a train wreck. But Britney Spears is good for the U.S. economy. Seriously.

Conde Nast's Portfolio magazine this month takes a look at the "Britney-Industrial Complex" and finds a $110 million to $120 million economy. What's troubling might be who is cashing in: paparazzi, the tabloids, lawyers and... um, websites.

Is the healthy Britney Spears economy good or bad for U.S. culture and American taste?

Read More

Ben likes: The Britney-Industrial Complex

Richard Cohen/The Washington Post

The Britney Industrial Complex illustrates the economy's need for celebrity. Vast amounts of money can be manufacturing ones who appeal particularly to the young. Spears was once one of those, although at age 26 she has leaped that demographic boundary. Still, the breadth of her drawing power cannot be fully estimated. Portfolio's concoction does not, for instance, measure her worth to the morning television shows -- "Today," etc. -- which on any given day are mere adjuncts to the fan magazines. Nor can it measure what she is worth to us as a topic of common interest for our communal water-cooler moments. Even this column has, in a sense, exploited her.

Read More

Joel likes: Media are off their game

Bill Dwyre/Los Angeles Times

Our society has a massive appetite for drama, and little for reality. We read about Britney Spears when we need to read about Afghanistan. And the media, which has the mandate -- and the constitutional right -- to lead us from this abyss, are all too often not doing so. Media, which once led public opinion, now all too often follow it.

She isn't news. She's titillation. She is a troubled young woman whom we cover with delight, rather than empathy. She is web hits, the current fool's gold of the newspaper industry.

Read More

How readers are voting

average
vote

Join the Debate

Start your own blog, comment on topics, and let your voice be heard. Start your free account now!

User login

login

Ads by Google