The Atlanta “Black Slate” seeks to capture the Atlanta mayor’s office today

Mary Norwood and Keisha Lance Bottoms are heading for a run-off on 2 December if the polls hold out going in to today’s elections. Ms Norwood held the lead in the polls well into the late summer and early fall, but fortune has changed in favor of Ms Bottoms who has amassed a two percentage point lead over the woman who could potentially be Atlanta’s first white mayor since 1974.

Ms Bottoms’ change in fortune may be due in part to a surge in campaign donations. According to the Atlanta Business ChronicleMs Bottoms led all candidates in fund raising in October.

How much the “Vote the Black Slate” movement has contributed to Ms Bottoms’ surge is debatable. The desire on the part of Atlanta blacks, especially those living in the southwest sector of the city, is real to the point of palpable. While Ms Norwood’s amicable personality is pleasing to a lot of blacks (Full disclosure. I voted for her in 2009 partly for that reason), increase in support for Ms Bottoms is visible. Campaign signs supporting Ms Bottoms have sprouted up in many southwest Atlanta yards like grass after a solid rain.

If Ms Bottoms does come out the victor and continues current mayor Kasim Reed’s economic policies, her voters may find themselves experiencing further disappointment. I have lived in the southwest sector of Atlanta for over nine years. The wielding of political power via the vote has not brought poor blacks in the sector any more real capital or employment opportunities. Gentrification has brought young white couples into the neighborhood, but their capital may be spent elsewhere in the city as they head out to work in the morning and return in the evening. Their capital sees no value in the southwest.

The “Vote the Black Slate” movement may help boost the self esteem of Atlanta’s black elite. Another black mayor gives them something to talk about during homecoming games and cocktail parties. What it does for blacks with no capital is another issue.

All political systems get hacked

All political systems get hacked. If you understood your nation’s history you would understand that its coming into existence was the result of a hack. You are too focused on the technology used today. Every 4th of July you celebrate the men that committed the first hack of the system and even they expected their newly created system subject to continuous hacking.

The real question is why would anyone attempt to hack a political system unless they believed the allocation of “justice” was not sufficient? Politics is about allocation of power. Whether the hackers are a bunch of slave-holding white boys in 1776, black and Jewish civil rights leaders in 1963, women’s lib protesters in 1972, or white nationalists in 2017, someone or some group is always hacking your system.

Maybe you should take a closer look at your system. It’s like driving a car that breaks down every ten miles. Sooner or later you have to figure out why.

Manafort and the bond market.

The Wall Street Journal today reported that investors did a little flight to safety moving money from equities into the bond markets as a result of today’s federal indictment of Paul Manafort, the former campaign manager for President Donald J. Trump. The increased demand drove up bond prices while sending bond yields down.

According to The Journal, yields fell to 2.374% from 2.426% for the ten-year Treasury note. Investors believe that the indictment will divert Mr Trump and Congress’ attention from tax reform and other economic growth initiatives. As the investigation continues and hearings for Mr Manafort get on the way, investors probably believe that the Administration will be in denial and prevent mode between now and mid-terms.

I believe that this indictment alone should not engender this type of fear and that by tomorrow it may pass.

My more experienced litigation posse may confirm this, but you are supposed to make your strongest argument up front, and if your argument is that there was complicity between the Trump campaign and Russia but your indictment of the campaign manager doesn’t even include the word, “Russia”, something is wrong.

Maybe Shonda Rhimes wrote this indictment or is running this investigation. Maybe she wants Mueller to do a Perry Mason and build up to a dramatic finish at the end.

So far, however, failure to properly vet a campaign manager is not an impeachable offense although one could raise questions about the judgment of Mr Trump.

Maybe there is a surprise ending being written in this script, details forthcoming. In the meantime, I don’t see the Trump administration being overly distracted by this indictment. I expect them, however, to create a few more of their own as their inside the Beltway experience grows.

How does regulating Facebook optimize returns on resources?

Farhad Manjoo writing for The New York Times argued in a recent article for increased regulation of “The Frightful Five”; Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft. For Mr Manjoo, their increasing intrusion into personal privacy and growth in the retail sector market should raise concerns on the part of regulators.

My takeaway from Mr Manjoo’s article is that government is moving further and further away from the opportunity of being simply a fair allocator of capital to oppressively regulating its distribution to the point where growth in the value of capital is squashed.

In addition, the Frightful Five have no monopoly on natural resources. They do not control land or access to air or minerals. As demand grows for internet services so too does demand grow for electricity use of the part of internet companies. In an article for Forbes.com, Christopher Helman estimates that internet firms account for 1.8% of electricity consumed in the United States. On an annual basis, internet companies are spending $7 billion a year to consume 70 billion kilowatt hours per year of electricity.

And given their two percent contribution to total greenhouse gas emissions, companies like Google have been purchasing energy from renewable energy sources with a 2017 goal of going 100% renewable, according to a piece by Adam Vaughan for The Guardian.com. As a consumer, Google and other internet companies aren’t in the energy extracting and generation business, making them susceptible, like any other consumer, to the whims of energy companies that actually have a license to extract, generate, and distribute energy.

In terms of human resources they higher relatively few people compared to other large companies in different sectors. The data processing, hosting, and related services sub-sector, within which companies like the Frightful Five belong, employed 364,000 people in September 2017, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. This total represents approximately .23% of the approximately 156 million people employed in the United States.

What the Frightful Five are first and foremost are tax revenue generators. While not responsible for extracting and managing the United States’ natural resources, by employing 364,000 wage earners and providing platforms for the sale of goods and services including advertisement, internet companies are providing a tax revenue stream for the United States government that didn’t exist twenty years ago.

How much in taxes would the United States be willing to forego by regulating the profit centers of internet companies? For example, in 2016, Alphabet, the parent of Google, had tax expenses of $4.7 billion at a tax rate of 19%, while Microsoft posted tax expenses of $3.3 billion at a tax rate of 16.5%. Apple paid $15.8 billion in taxes at a tax rate of 25.8%.

As Congress considers a corporate tax overhaul and the impact reform may have on its coffers and the deficit, does Washington want to risk reducing the tax revenues that keep its bond holders calm?

Rather, a better scenario for bond holders would be for government not to interfere in the Frightful Five’s ability to generate taxable income. Since internet companies do not manage directly the United States’ natural resources via extraction or distribution, there should be less reason for regulating these entities.

New beginnings at Lucubrare

Over the next few weeks you will be seeing changes to content here at Lucubrare. Our blog posts will explore alternative policies for American national government and society.  America, we believe, is at a crossroads regarding how it views itself as a nation and a society. Every empire has a turning point. America has reached hers and we are here to comment on it.

This is an exciting time here at both Lucubrare.  Stay tuned and thanks for your readership and support…