• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Texas A&M Forest Service
  • Texas A&M Veterinary Medical Diagnostics Laboratory
  • Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service
  • Texas A&M AgriLife Research
  • Texas A&M College of Agrculture and Life Sciences
Ellison Chair in International Floriculture
Ellison Chair in International FloricultureTeaching, Research, Extension and Service
  • Menu
  • #1593 (no title)
  • Benefits of Plants and Greenscapes
  • Plants, Nature, and Health Initiative
  • Marketing & Economics
  • Water Resources
  • Sustainability
  • Executive Academy for Growth & Leadership (EAGL)

Immigration Policy and Its Possible Effects on U.S. Agriculture

June 8, 2012 by Charlie

Source:  http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/June12/Features/ImmigrationPolicy.htm

Changes being considered would affect the market for hired farm labor.

Photo: Farmworkers in field

Policymakers are considering changes to U.S. immigration law that would affect the market for hired farm labor—including mandatory use of an Internet-based employment eligibility verification system and an expanded program for temporary nonimmigrant foreign-born farmworkers.

Labor is an important input to U.S. agriculture—accounting for about 17 percent of the sector’s variable production expenses and roughly 40 percent of such expenses for farms specializing in fruit, vegetables, or nursery products.

ERS analysis quantifies the possible effects of a decrease in the supply of unauthorized labor in all sectors of the U.S. economy—including agriculture—and an increase in the number of temporary nonimmigrant foreign-born farmworkers.

 

This article is drawn from . . .
The Potential Impact of Changes in Immigration Policy on U.S. Agriculture and the Market for Hired Farm Labor: A Simulation Analysis, by Steven Zahniser, Tom Hertz, Peter Dixon, and Maureen Rimmer, ERR-135, USDA, Economic Research Service, May 2012.

The 112th Congress is considering a variety of proposed changes to U.S. immigration law as it relates to foreign-born farmworkers. Some of these proposals would create additional opportunities for persons from other countries to work legally in U.S. agriculture, while others would use different methods to enforce existing U.S. immigration restrictions.

Any of these proposals, if enacted, is likely to have a substantial impact on U.S. agriculture and the market for hired farm labor. Labor is a major input for many agricultural sectors, and persons not authorized to work legally in the United States constitute a large share of the farmworkers employed by U.S. agriculture.

A recent ERS study considers two possible changes in the supply of foreign-born farmworkers: (1) a 156,000-person increase in the number of temporary nonimmigrant foreign-born farmworkers, such as those admitted under the current H-2A Temporary Agricultural Program, and (2) a 5.8-million-person reduction in the number of unauthorized workers in all sectors of the economy, including agriculture. The study quantifies the possible effects of these hypothetical scenarios on agricultural output and exports, the agricultural and nonagricultural job markets, and the economy as a whole.

Farm Labor’s Importance to U.S. Agriculture

During 2006-10, hired farm labor accounted for 17 percent of variable production expenses in U.S. agriculture and even higher proportions of such expenses in more labor-intensive sectors, such as vegetables (35 percent), nursery products (46 percent), and fruit (48 percent) (fig. 1). The farm labor situation is complicated, however, by the fact that many U.S. farmworkers lack the immigration status needed to work legally in this country. Analysis conducted by Daniel Carroll, Annie Georges, and Russell Saltz using the U.S. Department of Labor’s National Agricultural Workers Survey indicates that over the past 15 years, about half of the hired workers employed in U.S. crop agriculture were unauthorized, with the overwhelming majority of these workers coming from Mexico. Similar survey-based information on immigration status is not available for workers in livestock and dairy production.

Chart: Hired labor accounts for a large share of production costs for some crops

What Has Been Introduced in the 112th Congress?

Several bills related to immigration and farmworkers were introduced in the 112th Congress, two of which are discussed here. The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2011 (S. 1258) incorporates many elements of the Agricultural Job Opportunities, Benefits, and Security Act (AgJOBS), a decade-old proposal crafted by worker advocates and agricultural employers that was last introduced as a stand-alone bill in 2009. Several of its provisions make changes to the Federal Government’s H-2A Temporary Agricultural Program that might increase the program’s attractiveness to prospective employers. The H-2A program, as described by the U.S. Department of Labor, “establishes a means by which agricultural employers who anticipate a shortage of domestic workers can bring in nonimmigrant foreign workers to the U.S. to perform agricultural labor or services of a temporary or seasonal nature.” In fiscal year 2011, a total of 68,088 positions in the program were certified. Use of the H-2A program has decreased in recent years, and the number of certifications now corresponds with roughly one-tenth of hired farm laborers, according to USDA’s Farm Labor Survey.

One of the bill’s proposed modifications to the H-2A program concerns the adverse effect wage rate (AEWR), a wage rate that is determined by the U.S. Department of Labor so as not to affect adversely the employment opportunities of U.S. citizens and legal residents who want to perform farm work. Employers must pay their H-2A workers the highest of the Federal or State minimum wage, the prevailing hourly or piece rate, the agreed-upon collective bargaining rate, or the AEWR. For 2012, the AEWRs range from $9.30 per hour (Arkansas) to $12.26 per hour (Hawaii) and average $10.40 per hour for the 50 States.

The current bill would freeze the AEWR for each State at its January 1, 2011, level. If Congress does not establish a new wage standard for the H-2A program within 3 years of the bill’s enactment, then the AEWR would rise by the average of the consumer price index during the previous 2 years but by no more than 4 percent on an annual basis.

Another proposed modification to the H-2A program would allow goat herders, sheep herders, and dairy workers to participate and eventually apply for permanent residency under certain conditions. Currently, the H-2A program is limited to temporary or seasonal workers, which largely excludes dairy, livestock, and nursery operations from participating.

A second bill introduced to the 112th Congress, the Legal Workforce Act (H.R. 2885), would require all employers, agricultural and nonagricultural, to use E-Verify to confirm the employment eligibility of new hires. E-Verify is an Internet-based system operated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in partnership with the Social Security Administration. The system enables employers to determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the United States using the information reported by employees on their Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

The Legal Workforce Act would give agricultural employers 36 months to comply with its E-Verify mandate. Currently, the Federal Government does not require all private-sector employers to confirm the eligibility of their employees using E-Verify, although several State governments do. Some farm groups have expressed concern that mandating E-Verify—without some sort of new or expanded program for foreign-born, agricultural workers who are not currently authorized to work in the United States—would adversely affect many agricultural employers.

Simulation Analysis of Immigration Policy and U.S. Agriculture

ERS has not attempted to estimate the exact effects of the two proposed bills mentioned in this article. Instead, ERS has used a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to analyze the impact on the U.S. economy under two alternative scenarios in which the supply of foreign-born labor increases or decreases appreciably. A CGE model is a type of economic model that uses interrelated equations to represent an entire economy—agricultural and nonagricultural—and the interactions among its parts.

The model used in ERS’s study—the U.S. Applied General Equilibrium (USAGE) Model—differentiates the U.S. workforce into three categories according to immigration status:

  1. U.S. born;
  2. foreign-born, permanent resident: a person with the U.S. immigration status of permanent resident (including naturalized citizens) and thus legally authorized to work in the United States; and
  3. foreign-born, not a permanent resident: a person without the U.S. immigration status of permanent residency.

The majority of persons in this third category are not legally authorized to work in the United States. For this reason, the term “unauthorized” is sometimes used to refer to people in the third category, and the term “authorized” is sometimes used to refer to people in the first and second categories. The third category, however, also includes foreign-born persons with nonimmigrant visas, such as H-2A workers, who are legally authorized to work in the United States during a specified period but are not permanent residents of the United States.

With these categories in place, researchers used the model to generate longrun (15-year) economic projections for the United States under a base forecast and two alternative labor supply scenarios—one in which the number of temporary nonimmigrant, foreign-born farmworkers increases and one in which the number of unauthorized workers in all sectors of the economy decreases. The base forecast simulates how the economy would evolve under current laws and policies and serves as a benchmark for evaluating the two scenarios.

Like many CGE models, the USAGE model achieves a longrun equilibrium in which all labor and capital resources are nearly fully employed. Thus, the simulations reported here do not apply to the current economic environment, in which about 8.1 percent of the U.S. workforce is unemployed (as of April 2012). Instead, the model results describe hypothetical longrun scenarios in which the U.S. economy is much closer to full employment and has an unemployment rate of about 5 percent.

In the first scenario (increased farm labor supply), the number of temporary nonimmigrant foreign-born farmworkers is assumed to increase by about 30,000 in Year 1 of the simulation and 83,000 in Year 2. The growth rate for the number of such workers declines in subsequent years, with participation reaching 156,000 additional workers in Year 15. The additional workers are assumed to be available to all agricultural sectors, including those that have been traditionally excluded by the H-2A program, and no constraint similar to the AEWR is placed on their wages.

In the second scenario (decreased unauthorized labor supply), the unauthorized workforce—agricultural and nonagricultural—is assumed to decrease by 2.1 million in absolute terms over the first 5 years of the scenario. Under this scenario in Year 5, the unauthorized workforce in the U.S. economy as a whole is 4.0 million people smaller than in the base forecast. Growth in the unauthorized workforce resumes thereafter but at a slower pace than in the base forecast. By Year 15, the projected size of the unauthorized workforce is 8.5 million, compared with 14.3 million in the base forecast, a difference of 5.8 million, or 40 percent.

Modeling Results

The results from the increased farm labor supply scenario conform to basic economic principles when the supply of one factor or input of production—such as labor, land, or machinery—becomes more plentiful. Greater availability of temporary nonimmigrant foreign-born farmworkers leads to their increased employment at lower wages. This, in turn, results in longrun increases in agricultural output and exports, above and beyond the growth projected by the base forecast. The increases in output and exports are generally larger in labor-intensive sectors such as fruit, tree nuts, vegetables, and nursery products. By Year 15 of the scenario, these four sectors experience a 1.1- to 2.0-percent increase in output and a 1.7- to 3.2-percent increase in exports, relative to the base forecast. Less labor-intensive sectors, such as grains, oilseeds, and livestock production, tend to have smaller increases, ranging from 0.1 to 1.5 percent for output and from 0.2 to 2.6 percent for exports.

Accompanying this additional growth in agricultural output and employment, however, would be a relative decrease of about 5.7 percent in the number of U.S.-born and other permanent residents employed as farmworkers and a 3.4-percent relative decrease in their wage rate. In the model, U.S.-born and foreign-born permanent resident workers are assumed to compete with foreign-born temporary nonimmigrant workers in the labor market. A 3.4-percent relative decrease in the wage rate does not mean that the wage rate is projected to fall by 3.4 percent over the 15-year period of the projection. Instead, it means that the wage rate in Year 15 is projected to be 3.4 percent lower in the increased farm labor supply scenario than in the base forecast.

The longrun results from the decreased unauthorized labor supply scenario show a reduction in the labor supply to agriculture with effects on agricultural output and exports that are opposite in sign from the increased farm labor supply scenario and larger in magnitude. Fruit, tree nuts, vegetables, and nursery production are again among the most affected sectors but with longrun relative declines of 2.0 to 5.4 percent in output and 2.5 to 9.3 percent in exports. These effects tend to be smaller in other, less labor-intensive, parts of agriculture—a 1.6- to 4.9-percent decrease in output and a 0.3- to 7.4-percent decrease in exports.

Changes in labor supply affect output, exports, employment, and earnings in the long run

Variable

Scenarios

Increased farm
labor supply

Decreased unauthorized labor supply

Assumed impact on labor supply

+ 156,000 temporary nonimmigrant, foreign-born farmworkers

– 5.8 million unauthorized
workers, farm and nonfarm

Percent change

Percent change

Fruit, tree nuts, vegetables, nurseries
Output

+ 1.1 to 2.0

–2.0 to –5.4

Exports

+ 1.7 to 3.2

–2.5 to –9.3

Other agricultural sectors    
Output

+ 0.1 to 1.5

–1.6 to –4.9

Exports

+ 0.2 to 2.6

–0.3 to –7.4

 

Percent change

Percent change

Employment in agriculture

+ 1.7

–3.4 to –5.5

U.S.-born & foreign-born, permanent resident

– 5.7

+2.4 to 4.0

Foreign-born, not a permanent resident

+ 32.4

–34.1 to –38.8

Earnings per job in agriculture

– 4.4

+ 3.9 to 9.9

U.S.-born & foreign-born, permanent resident

– 3.4

+ 3.3 to 7.5

Foreign-born, not a permanent resident

– 10.0

+ 13.6 to 39.8

 

Percent change

Nonfarm employment of U.S.-born and other permanent residents

Negligible effects on
nonfarm economy

 
Lower paying occupations

+2.2 to 3.2

Higher paying occupations*

–0.5 to –0.7

Nonfarm earnings per job of U.S.-born and other permanent residents

Lower paying occupations

+1.7 to 4.5

Higher paying occupations*

–0.2 to –0.6

GNP, less payments to people without permanent residency status

–0.9 to –1.1

*Annual income of $20,000 or more.
A negligible effect is an increase or decrease of less than 0.05 percent.
Results are estimates of percent difference in the outcome between the base forecast and the alternative scenario in Year 15 of the policy period.
GNP=Gross National Product.

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service.

As part of the decreased unauthorized labor supply scenario, the number of unauthorized workers employed as farmworkers falls by between 34.1 and 38.8 percent, depending on modeling assumptions, relative to the base forecast for Year 15. At the same time, the number of farmworkers who are either U.S.-born or foreign-born, permanent residents increases by about 2.4 to 4.0 percent in the long run, compared with the base forecast, and their wage rate increases by 3.3 to 7.5 percent. However, the increased farm employment of U.S.-born and other permanent resident workers is not sufficient to offset the decrease in unauthorized farmworkers. As a result, the total number of farmworkers decreases by 3.4 to 5.5 percent.

Some observers question whether a reduction in the number of unauthorized workers would benefit or harm U.S.-born and other permanent resident workers. Model results suggest that wages would rise (relative to the base forecast) in some lower paying occupations where unauthorized workers are common, decrease slightly in many higher paying occupations, and decrease on average.

Several factors account for the slight decrease in earnings. First, the decrease in the supply of unauthorized labor leads to a longrun relative decrease in production, not just in agriculture but in all sectors of the economy. This, in turn, reduces incomes to many complementary factors of production, including U.S.-born and foreign-born, permanent resident workers in higher paying occupations. Second, with the departure of so many unauthorized workers, the occupational distribution of U.S.-born and other permanent resident workers necessarily shifts in the direction of more hired farm work and other lower paying occupations, such as food service, child care, and housekeeping, and away from higher paying occupations (a much larger category). The effect of this compositional change is to reduce the average real wage for U.S.-born and foreign-born, permanent resident workers in all sectors of the economy, even as real wages in many lower paying occupations rise.

In the long term, overall gross national product accruing to U.S.-born and foreign-born, permanent residents would fall by about 1 percent, compared with the base forecast. This result indicates that the negative economic effects generated by the departure of a significant portion of the labor force outweigh the positive effects on the wages of U.S.-born workers and other permanent residents employed in lower paying occupations. This conclusion, however, might be different in a model that reproduced current levels of unemployment, rather than describing a longrun equilibrium in which the economy is much closer to full employment.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: immigration reform, labor

Effects of Advertising in Generating Grower Sales

June 8, 2012 by Charlie

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: webinars

Misperceptions about healthy food: Does this correlate to misperceptions about plants?

May 19, 2012 by Charlie

Most Americans consume diets that do not meet Federal dietary recommendations. A common explanation is that healthier foods are more expensive than less healthy foods. To investigate this assumption, the authors of this USDA study compare prices of healthy and less healthy foods using three different price metrics: the price of food energy ($/calorie), the price of edible weight ($/100 edible grams), and the price of an average portion ($/average portion). They also calculate the cost of meeting the recommendations for each food group. For all metrics except the price of food energy, the authors find that healthy foods cost less than less healthy foods (defined for this study as foods that are high in saturated fat, added sugar, and/or sodium, or that contribute little to meeting dietary recommendations). Bottom line — it depends on how you measure their price! See http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib96/.

Perhaps flowers, shrubs, and trees are also perceived as expensive relative to other things that folks might spend their disposable income dollars on, particularly if the end consumer perceives them as mere interior and exterior landscape enhancements. But if all of the economic, environmental, and health/well-being benefits are considered, then plants are the best bargain going. Again, it depends on how you measure their price! See http://www.americainbloom.org/resources/Discover-Plants-Brochure-and-Presentation.aspx.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: benefits of plants

An easy way to support America in Bloom

May 14, 2012 by Charlie

As many of you are aware, America in Bloom(AIB) promotes nationwide beautification through education and community involvement by encouraging the use of flowers, plants, trees, and other environmental and lifestyle enhancements.

One of the ways that AIB raises funds (besides sponsorships) is to hold an annual raffle. Wouldn’t it feel good to put $5,000; $1,000, or even $500 in your pocket? If you purchase an AIB raffle ticket you just might be one of the lucky cash prize winners! The 2010 raffle generated over $30,000 in funding for America in Bloom.

The raffle will be held during the OFA Short Course. You do not need to be present to win. It’s also easy to participate. Simply buy your raffle tickets online using the secure form.

Now you may be asking…Why should I buy a raffle ticket? Let me answer that by summarizing what AIB participating cities say about the program:

AIB is a quality of life improvement program
…a great concept that can help develop both beautification and economic improvement
… a grassroots program that believes that connecting people and plants is important to everyone’s quality of life
… the propagation of the love of plants and their interaction with our communities
…enhancing cities to make them better places to live
…a program that promotes community health by using horticulture
…a program that builds pride of place for communities and enhances awareness of different facets of the community

AIB is a community improvement program
…an opportunity to make a community more appealing through community involvement
…a challenging experience, but worth the effort to see a cocoon become a butterfly
…a nation wide program that brings a community together to beautify inside and out
…a unique and informative creative concept to highlight your community and improve overall involvement of the neighborhoods …a wonderful shot in our community’s arm; through it we are reborn
…a community effort to beautify and improve your town by getting the residents involved
…an opportunity for communities to identify and build their image
…amazing as it provide the process to get cities and towns moving and working together to improve their communities

AIB is a civic pride and community involvement program
…an organization to promote pride in cities
…a beautification program for each community that nurtures volunteerism
…a way to pull together volunteers to impact the community
…about bringing people together to make our city better
…a community building and enhancement program
…a community beautification organization that promotes civic pride
…a community effort to showcase pride in the community through plants, flowers, trees
…community beautification …a contagious awakening of community pride
…a method for involving the total community in planting pride in our communities
…a community improvement and beautification contest

AIB is an educational and community engagement program
…a very educational program that makes our communities more aware of how beautiful we can make our communities by working together
…a teaching experience to educate rather than criticize
…an incredibly motivating organization that serves as a catalyst for building community pride and participation
…an organization that promotes community pride, passion and education

A source of inspiration
…inspiring and encouraging
…a facilitator of community involvement and inspiration for change and improvement

AIB is a catalyst
…a great resource and motivator to improve our city’s public image as well as sales revenue for downtown businesses
…motivating and inspiring
…rewarding
…a municipal and volunteer self improvement program that brings the community together
…a vehicle to coordinate community improvement
…the contest is a catalyst for action on a continuing basis

AIB is a friendly competition
…disguised as a friendly competition, but serves our community as a unifier for the various non profits, corporations, private citizens for a common goal
…a contest that can be used to generate enthusiasm and education for community wide improvement projects

AIB is a valuable tool
…comprehensive inexpensive survey of a city
…a powerful community building tool
…a program that gives us an annual list of potential problems to address from the judges’ visit

Not convinced yet?  Then I invite you to visit the America in Bloom website to learn more! Or better yet, look for me or any other board member at the OFA Shortcourse and we’d be happy to talk more about how AIB is an important tool for ensuring the relevancy of floriculture in the future!

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: America in Bloom

New Estimates of the Housing Wealth Effect

May 1, 2012 by Charlie

A new report from the NBER by Charles W. Calomiris, Stanley D. Longhofer, and William Miles shows that “on average, a single dollar increase in housing wealth raises consumption by between five and eight cents.”

If the value of a homeowner’s house rises by one dollar, how much will that homeowner increase spending on consumption? In The Housing Wealth Effect: The Crucial Roles of Demographics, Wealth Distribution, and Wealth Shares (NBER Working Paper No. 17740), authors Charles Calomiris, Stanley Longhofer, and William Miles determine that the impact of housing wealth on consumer spending depends crucially on the age and wealth distribution within states, as well as on the share of housing wealth relative to total wealth. In particular, they find that young people, who are more likely to be credit-constrained, and older homeowners, who are likely to be “trading down” on their housing stock, experience the largest housing wealth effects. Housing wealth effects also are higher in years when housing wealth shares represent a larger portion of overall wealth an d in years with higher poverty rates. Thus, there tends to be huge variation over time and across states in the size of housing wealth effects.

For this study, the researchers constructed a new annual dataset for each of the U.S. states for the period 1981-2009, taking into account the relative amount of state-level housing and securities wealth in any given year. They also considered differences in age distribution and poverty rates, both across states and over time, because housing wealth effects tend to be larger in state-years with high proportions of young and old people, and in state-years with higher poverty rates. In addition, they estimated holdings of corporate stock in each state by calculating aggregate U.S. stock wealth and multiplying by each state’s share of aggregate mutual fund holdings.

Calomiris, Longhofer, and Miles find that consumption responds positively to innovations in both housing wealth and securities wealth, but that housing wealth effects are significantly larger than stock wealth effects. They estimate that on average, a single dollar increase in housing wealth raises consumption by between five and eight cents. In contrast, the same dollar increase in the value of securities wealth raises consumption by less than two cents. Nonetheless, there is substantial variation across states and over time in both of these consumption responses to wealth changes, which are related to the age, poverty, and wealth characteristics of various states at particular points in time.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: housing industry, recovery

Relationship between tree canopy and crime

April 28, 2012 by Charlie

Publication year: 2012

Source:Landscape and Urban Planning

Austin Troy, J. Morgan Grove, Jarlath O’Neil-Dunne

The extent to which urban tree cover influences crime is in debate in the literature. This research took advantage of geocoded crime point data and high resolution tree canopy data to address this question in Baltimore City and County, MD, an area that includes a significant urban–rural gradient. Using ordinary least squares and spatially adjusted regression and controlling for numerous potential confounders, we found that there is a strong inverse relationship between tree canopy and our index of robbery, burglary, theft and shooting. The more conservative spatially adjusted model indicated that a 10% increase in tree canopy was associated with a roughly 12% decrease in crime. When we broke down tree cover by public and private ownership for the spatial model, we found that the inverse relationship continued in both contexts, but the magnitude was 40% greater for public than for private lands. We also used geographically weighted regression to identify spatial non-stationarity in this relationship, which we found for trees in general and trees on private land, but not for trees on public land. Geographic plots of pseudo-t statistics indicated that while there was a negative relationship between crime and trees in the vast majority of block groups of the study area, there were a few patches where the opposite relationship was true, particularly in a part of Baltimore City where there is an extensive interface between industrial and residential properties. It is possible that in this area a significant proportion of trees is growing in abandoned lands between these two land uses.

 

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: benefits of plants

Valentine’s Day Consumer Insights 2012

March 12, 2012 by Charlie

Valentine’s Day Consumer Insights 2012 | Think Insights with Google.

Interesting insights from Google regarding online Valentine’s Day shopping behavior.

 

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Discover the Surprising Side of Plants

March 12, 2012 by Charlie

America in Bloom has announced the release of a 12-page, full color educational brochure titled, “Discover the Surprising Side of Plants.” Based on research and publications by America in Bloom (AIB) board member Charles Hall, PhD of Texas A&M and others, the brochure summarizes benefits of plants “beyond pretty” for people, communities, neighborhoods, and even offices. Illustrated with photos from many participating America in Bloom towns, the brochure concludes that “quality landscapes are a necessity, not a luxury.”

A PowerPoint presentation based on the brochure is available for teachers to use in their curricula and for others to share in their own presentations.

The brochure will be offered to attendees at the AIB exhibit at the Philadelphia Flower Show, OFA’s Short Course and other venues. AIB sponsors at the gold or higher level are eligible to receive up to 500 complimentary copies.

“This piece is an ideal promotional tool for nurseries and garden centers. We feel so strongly about the benefits of plants to the well-being of people, towns, and even the economy, that we are offering the printed brochure to interested parties at our cost, plus shipping,” says Marvin Miller, AIB’s president.

To download the brochure and related presentation, go to www.americainbloom.org/discover_plants.aspx.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: America in Bloom, benefits of plants

Bernanke to deliver lecture series

March 1, 2012 by Charlie

The Federal Reserve Board announced on Thursday that Chairman Ben S. Bernanke will deliver a series of lectures aimed at college students. Beginning on March 20, he will lead four classes on “The Federal Reserve and the Financial Crisis” as part of a course offered to undergraduates at the George Washington University School of Business. The class will feature a variety of speakers who will discuss central banking. Chairman Bernanke’s lectures are scheduled for March 20, 22, 27 and 29 and will begin at 12:45 pm EDT.

To access the lecture series live, use the following link: http://www.ustream.tv/federalreserve

More info: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/lectures/about.htm

Visit website

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: financial markets

Abbott & Costello Economics

February 16, 2012 by Charlie

Unemployment is dropping — as explained by Bud & Lou:

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible times. It’s 9%.
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that’s about 20%.
COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that’s about 20%.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 20% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 9%…
COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 20%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 20% are out of work.
COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they ARE out of work!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn’t look for work, can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.
COSTELLO: To whom?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work… Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you’re off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how you get to 9%. Otherwise, it would be 20%. You don’t want to read about 20% unemployment do ya?
COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means they’re two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like a politician.
COSTELLO: I don’t even know what I just said!

Filed Under: Content Tagged With: economic forecasts, labor

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Page 5
  • Page 6
  • Page 7
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 52
  • Go to Next Page »

About the Chair

  • About the Chairholder
  • Donors
  • Contacts

Advisory Commitee

  • Overview
  • Permanent Seats
  • Rotating Seats
  • Ex-Officio Members
  • Members Emeritus
  • Early History of the Ellison Chair

Multimedia

  • Webinars
  • Distinguished Lecture Series

Conferences/Workshops

  • Executive Academy for Growth & Leadership (EAGL)
View Charlie Hall's profile on LinkedIn
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service
Texas A&M University System Member
  • Compact with Texans
  • Privacy and Security
  • Accessibility Policy
  • State Link Policy
  • Statewide Search
  • Veterans Benefits
  • Military Families
  • Risk, Fraud & Misconduct Hotline
  • Texas Homeland Security
  • Texas Veteran's Portal
  • Equal Opportunity
  • Open Records/Public Information