For about 20 years, Ray Keating wrote a weekly column - a short time with the New York City Tribune, more than 11 years with Newsday, another seven years with Long Island Business News, plus another year-and-a-half with RealClearMarkets.com. As an economist, Keating also pens an assortment of analyses each week. With the Keating Files, he decided to expand his efforts with regular commentary touching on a broad range of issues, written by himself and an assortment of talented contributors and columnists. So, here goes...

Thursday, February 25, 2016

Where Are the Islanders Headed Next?

by Ray Keating

Gee, couldn’t see this one coming. What? The New York Post reported that the Islanders are not too happy playing in Brooklyn.

After last season, the Islanders cleared out of the aging Nassau Coliseum for the Barclays Center. But the Brooklyn arena was not built with hockey in mind. The Isles managed to move into an arena with the second smallest seating capacity in the league. Oh yes, and there’s the fact that the team has no real fan base in Brooklyn. This season, the Islanders have the third lowest average attendance in the NHL.

Whoops.

As reported, though, the team and the Barclays Center have an opt-out after the fourth season the Islanders play in the arena.

But where would the Islanders go?

No doubt, many Long Island fans want to see their team come back. That’s especially the case given that the Islanders improved their play during their last season in Nassau and are playing well this year. Islanders fans waited so long to get a winner back, and then the team went off to Brooklyn.

But a move to Nassau or Suffolk County seems unlikely. The Nassau Coliseum renovation will make that arena even smaller than Barclays, and who would fork over the dollars for an arena in Suffolk? Not to mention that it’s a highly questionable endeavor to place an NHL team on the island. Other than the cable TV deal, the Islanders on Long Island made little sense over the years.

Interestingly, the NHL is considering expansion, with Quebec and Las Vegas in the running, along with Seattle. Heck, Quebec has a new arena with no NHL team. For good measure, Kansas City has an arena without a team.

Here’s my guess: Las Vegas and Quebec get expansion teams, and the Islanders head off to Kansas City eventually.

Remember the Kansas City Scouts once played in the NHL, and then moved on to become the Colorado Rockies, and finally the New Jersey Devils. If the Isles wind up on K.C., just think of it as the New York metro area returning the favor.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning for Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…



Throwback Thursday: Elections Do Not Repeal Laws of Economics

by Ray Keating

As we watch the carnage of the 2016 presidential election process, it pays to keep in mind that policy matters, and that so-called smart people frequently make bad economic policy decisions. The following column, which originally ran in Long Island Business News in November 2008, debunked the idea served up by many at the time that Barack Obama was just too smart to actually carry through on the policies he supported during the campaign. We, unfortunately, have learned that Obama actually meant what he said, as I argued at the time…

Politics and elections do not repeal the laws of economics.

This fact of life tends to irritate many politicians. On the campaign trail, they pander for votes, and put forth the idea that government can do just about anything. It can tax, regulate, and spend with impunity.

Of course, it’s a complete myth that fundamental economics can be repealed by political rhetoric or legislation. And that is the harsh reality that confronts President-elect Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats who will have larger majorities in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate come January.

During his time in the U.S. Senate and on the presidential campaign trail, Obama had very little use for sound economics. For example, he put forth an agenda featuring higher taxes on successful entrepreneurs and investors, as well as on energy companies. Obama also revealed protectionist leanings on the trade front. And he exhibited few qualms about embracing more government spending or an activist regulatory agenda.

Economics 101 tells us that all of this would mean higher costs for businesses and consumers, and bad news for an already-reeling economy.

But in the days leading up to and following the election, assorted experts and talking heads on television have assured everyone not to worry. After all, as we have been told over and over again, Obama is a smart fellow, and he will surround himself with other smart people.

The point, or hope, seems to be that Obama and his aides are just too intelligent to actually try to put his campaign agenda into law. After all, these smart people are not going to do anything that would jeopardize Obama getting re-elected in four years.

There are two major problems with this line of reasoning.

First, history is rich with so-called smart people who made – to put it less than delicately – dumb decisions. That list includes a variety of U.S. presidents. Let’s recall that Herbert Hoover was very smart. In fact, so were Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. Yet, these smarty-pants made some of the worst economic policy decisions in our nation’s history; decisions that rattled the nation and the globe. Hoover and Carter also wanted to be reelected, but were booted out of office by big numbers.

Second, the unsavory implication is that Obama did not really believe all of those things he declared and proposed during the campaign. It was just what had to be said to get the Democratic nomination, and then to win the White House.

I don’t believe that. I take the president-elect at his word. If you look at Obama’s short voting record in the Senate and his campaign proposals, they reveal a consistent liberal philosophy that favors bigger government, more regulation, and higher taxes, along with skepticism of free trade.

In the real political world, smart people make bad decisions all of the time. Political ideology, poll watching and/or simple emotion often overwhelm or blind elected officials to sound economic thinking.

Where then is the hope for the economy? Well, at least on the policy front, there isn’t a heck of a lot. We’re in a bad economy right now, and most of the policy proposals offered by President-elect Obama will, at best, do nothing to help, or at worst, make matters worse.

One hope is that President-elect Obama and his staff will quickly learn through on-the-job training what policies make for sound economics, and which ones do not.

But our best hope comes from the private sector – from the innovative entrepreneurs, the risk-taking investors, the courageous small business owners, and their hard-working employees. These are the people who will have to find ways to survive and thrive in what is likely to be an increasingly hostile policy climate. Through their ingenuity, they must find avenues around governmental obstacles in order to move ahead, in order to grow the economy, in order to create new jobs. Unfortunately, this already difficult task looks like it will only grow harder in the immediate future.


______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning for Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…



Friday, February 19, 2016

Governor Cuomo and the Minimum Wage


by Ray Keating

The bad economic apple does not fall far from the tree – especially in New York.

That’s clear with Governor Andrew Cuomo’s effort called the Mario Cuomo Campaign for Economic Justice, named for his late father who also was a governor of New York. What’s the point of this campaign? To jack up New York’s minimum wage to $15 per hour – that is, more than double the federal mandate of $7.25 per hour.

Like his father, Andrew Cuomo has a tough time understanding economics, including the economics of the minimum wage.

New York already imposes a high minimum wage at $9.00. For good measure, Cuomo had his labor commissioner impanel a wage board, which in July of last year recommended a $15 minimum wage applied to employees of fast-food chains. This will be phased in by the end of 2018 in New York City and throughout the rest of the state by mid-2021.

The current Cuomo campaign wants to expand the $15 wage mandate to all industries. On the effort’s website, it says, “A campaign is underway to make New York the first state in the nation to adopt a $15 an hour minimum wage.” Why? According to the Cuomo campaign, “A reasonable minimum wage is a necessity to improve the standard of living for workers, encourage fair and more efficient business practices, and ensure that the most vulnerable members of the workforce can contribute to the economy.”

Of course, all of this amounts to nothing more than political wishful thinking and pandering.

The politics and the economics of raising the minimum wage are unmistakable – but they also happen to be diametrically opposed.

Consider, for example, that according to a Siena College poll released on February 1, 65 percent of New York voters support raising the state’s minimum wage to $15. The problem is that government cannot simply dictate to businesses what they must pay individuals, without there being serious, negative consequences. After all, if it could, then why stop at $15 an hour. Why not $50, or $100?

Contrary to what many politicians and voters apparently think, a higher minimum wage only raises costs for businesses, while hurting young, low-skilled, low-income workers by reducing job opportunities.

The economics of the minimum wage are clear, and not really in any serious dispute. For example, in a 2007 study, economists David Neumark (University of California-Irvine) and William Wascher (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System) reviewed the economic literature since the early 1990s on the employment effects of the minimum wages. They concluded: “[T]he oft-stated assertion that the new minimum wage research fails to support the conclusion that the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-skilled workers is clearly incorrect. Indeed, in our view, the preponderance of the evidence points to disemployment effects.”

As for the impact on business, consider an Employment Policies Institute (EPI) study released in May 2006 written by economist Joseph Sabia from University of Georgia. It looked at the effects of a higher minimum wage, including on the small business and retail sectors. EPI noted that the “results confirm the consensus economic opinion that increases in the minimum wage decrease employment, particularly for low-skilled and entry-level employees.” And as for small businesses and the retail sector:  “A 10 percent increase in the minimum wage is associated with a 2.7 to 4.3 percent decline in teen employment in the retail sector, a 5 percent decline in average retail hours worked by all teenagers, and a 2.8 percent decline in retail hours worked by teenagers who remain employed in retail jobs. These results increase in magnitude when focusing on the effect on small businesses. A 10 percent increase in the minimum wage is associated with a 4.6 to 9.0 percent decline in teenage employment in small businesses and a 4.8 to 8.8 percent reduction in hours worked by teens in the retail sector.”

For good measure, studies overwhelmingly show that raising the minimum wage is ineffective in reducing poverty rates, particularly given the reduction in job opportunities.

Rather than political ignorance and pandering winning out on economic policy matters, including the minimum wage, in New York, wouldn’t it be refreshing if Governor Andrew Cuomo managed to align policymaking with actual economics? But alas, it’s probably too much to have the apple indeed fall far from the tree.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning for Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…


Thursday, February 18, 2016

Throwback Thursday: Learning from a Classic Business Thinker

by Ray Keating

One of the best things about writing and researching in your career is that the learning never stops. This column, which originally ran in Long Island Business News in December 2014, serves up some insights learned from Peter Drucker on managing one’s career…

An anniversary snuck up on me the other day. It turns out that 2014 marked a quarter century of my writing on the economy, policy, business, and more.

That includes being a weekly newspaper columnist for the now-defunct “New York City Tribune,” then for “Newsday,” and for nearly seven years now with “Long Island Business News.” Toss in seven-plus years of teaching in the business school at Dowling College, serving as an economist in the policy world for nearly two-dozen years, and writing ten books, and I’ve been at this knowledge worker thing for a long time.

One of the best parts of these gigs is that the process of learning has never stopped. I always learn when I write. Also, teaching management classes provides assorted lessons or refreshers for my career. That occurred this semester as I turned to one of the classic business thinkers of the past 75 years – Peter Drucker.

Drucker, who died in 2005 at the age of 95, provided insights on management, in the broadest sense of the word, from the late 1930s into the twenty-first century. “BusinessWeek” once referred to him as “the man who invented management.”

Regarding his contributions, the website of the Peter Drucker Institute sums up: Drucker “predicted many of the major developments of the late 20th century, including privatization and decentralization, the rise of Japan to economic world power, the decisive importance of marketing and innovation, and the emergence of the information society with its necessity of lifelong learning. In the late 1950s, Drucker coined the term ‘knowledge worker,’ and he spent the rest of his life examining an age in which an unprecedented number of people use their brains more than their backs.”

I appreciated Drucker’s plain talk that innovation is just as much about hard work, persistence, analyzing opportunities and focus, as it is about inspiration and ingenuity. He wrote about “systematic innovation” and the “discipline of innovation.” Most people default to innovation being mysterious and ethereal. But innovation is grounded in the real world; after all, it is the act of bringing a new or improved product or process to the marketplace. Drucker summed up, “If diligence, persistence, and commitment are lacking, talent, ingenuity, and knowledge are of no avail.”

This semester, I introduced students and myself to Drucker’s Harvard Business Review article “Managing Oneself.” It’s a fascinating piece focused on managing, developing and preparing yourself in order to stay “engaged over a 50-year working life.” He offered a systematic process of assessing your own strengths, preferred working and learning styles, values compared to the firm’s values, and coming to understand how and where you can make the best contributions.

Interestingly, though, for both my much younger students and me, what seemed to hit home was Drucker’s discussion of preparing for and launching an eventual second or parallel career. He noted that most midlife crises are about boredom, as even those who are very good at their jobs still eventually might find a lack of learning, contribution or challenge, despite having another 20-25 years of work ahead.

The students were interested in Drucker’s advice to start preparing for a second career long before entering the second half of your career. I found it interesting that I already had undertaken this process when I started writing novels a few years ago. The students became interested in planning ahead, while I reflected on managing in the midst of the second/parallel career.

I’ve always taught students that your career will be more satisfying if you think of yourself as an entrepreneur, that you are your own small business. Drucker put it just a bit different: “In effect, managing oneself demands that each knowledge worker think and behave like a chief executive officer.” Thinking this way offers a different perspective on your career, whether you own a business or have one boss. As your own CEO or small business, you both have control and must work to make your customers (such as your boss) happy. That’s business, including managing yourself.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning for Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…