@Shalmaneser: More restrictive immigration policy as a tool to build wages and reduce surplus labor have some negative effects; they were tried by both Hoover and Roosevelt with only limited success.

With regards to current policy, however, let's not forget that it was a determined lack of enforcement of that policy that helped bring millions of illegal workers to America. One might wonder if the Executive, now, is simply asking for a policy that it feels "it can enforce?" Both Republicans and Democrats, for various reasons, have winked at open immigration; they often talk tough about fences, and border guards, but likely they see that as a "talking point" meant to disguise their real intent: An open-door policy that allows any foreign worker to come to America and work!

Low wage workers DO enhance the U.S. GDP, but the benefits are shared unequally; those at the top -- including the famous senators -- benefit when lower wage Americans are displaced from their jobs and the costs of labor go down! Moreover, in industries like carpet, poultry, meat-packing, and others, new immigrants often get strangle-holds on all those jobs and seek to get rid of any white or black American workers. This is why, for instance, in Dalton, nearly every menial laborer is from Mexico. Again, once they are allowed in, they force out U.S. citizens. THEN, preference and opportunity is given to foreign citizens, BEFORE U.S. citizens!

As noted, if more restrictive immigration policy helps only a little, we need to discuss, then, what happens when the U.S. -- in a time of Depression -- further opens the door to immigrants, particularly those with high skills in computers and engineering? WHY are THEY doing THAT?!

It fits my long-stated theory about the globalization agenda; and it suggests that many of our leaders remain aloof from the working class U.S. citizens they represent.

Philosophically, U.S. citizens and the "middle class" are conditioned by the media to feel they are "bigots" or "racially profiling" whence they protest foreign workers taking the jobs previously held by U.S. citizens; likely the immigrants see it as the "great opportunity" it is -- the U.S. government actually favors THEM before their OWN citizens!

But don't more restrictive policies prevent able and willing workers from working? Yes, and that is unfortunate; it's too bad that other countries, like the U.S., don't have enough jobs! But, all across the planet this is true; instead of pitting working class Mexicans against Americans, why not get them to work, domestically, in their own countries to FORCE elected leaders to improve competitiveness and improve economic opportunity?!

No need to play "gotcha" with Huckaby!

In the first place, "higher education" is time-away from the world of work, afforded by public and private subsidies; the idea that this endeavor is undertaken in order to "get a good job" is of recent vintage. Instead, students are given the high privilege and honor of further studies.

Legislators, including Nathan Deal, now have more influence over GA's higher education because that system, unfortunately, over-expanded and borrowed and is now in the process of "hocking" the whole thing! Whether it's kind words for the Governor's ear, or greater access by private donors, higher ed is transferring its precious mission over to creditors.

The system was never intended as a "jobs program," and certainly cheaper versions of such a thing could be had in private apprenticeship programs, etc. Nor is higher education more than an indirect driver of economic development; using those resources to "prove" it "grows jobs" is both self-serving and destined for failure.

Huckaby, now, one of a number of Regent's Millionaires, contents himself knowing he can keep his "good thing" if he'll only suborn the rich and powerful; he is not a leader, but one who wears another man's collar.

All of this drama, now, of higher education battling against moneyed interests, and wooing creditors, ought make a good play. It would include avarice, foolishness, and an age-old of tale of those who ought to know better; doing and saying things they know they shouldn't do, or say!

Yarbrough is not always the best spokesman for whatever cause he takes up, but I bet his take on this issue is a popular one.

Fatuous and smirking? Occasionally! But why not extol your own position with regard to the controversy while setting Mr. Yarbrough straight?

Apparently, sight of the Bible gave the park patron a panic attack! I certainly do sympathize with him, however. In their Faith, many subscribing to various religious orthodoxies seem to enjoy a Peace, and yes -- open-mindedness -- that the non-believers have not yet found.

A 2011 study put Ben Epps’ total economic impact at in the Athens-Clarke County region at $20.6 million, with 172 jobs resulting from it. While there aren’t specific numbers on how this project will impact that, it can only help, Beggerly said.

Mostly these studies are put together by people wishing to overstate the case; they are worthless as tools to develop public policy.

A more basic analysis of CEO compensation would reveal this:

The people who grant the "money-making" incentive are likely people, who, themselves, can be given big raises, bonuses, etc., by that CEO! Anyone wondering about why CEOs are paid extremely high multiples of the average workers salary, needs to realize how it really works! (Whether its "good" for the stockholders, workers, or the country of origin is not considered at all: It's all about the money!)

At one big University in GA, after the head of the private Athletic Association got a whopping raise from the President; he turned right around and approved a fat supplement for the President's pay from Association funds!

The people at the top have permanent million-dollar smiles on their faces! They are dancing all the time!

@mcdawg: A rather hard-hitting critique from Whitney at CP!

"One can only wonder if Krugman would change his mind if he knew that Abe is a right-wing militarist whose real objective in using Keynesian theories is to rebuild imperial Japan’s war machine while clamping down on working people."

So ... Abe has successfully caused investors to doubt BOJ bonds? On the one hand, he promises to halve their value (by doubling the supply of money); but then central bankers boost long-term interest rates to keep investors from fleeing!

I'd guess the cure will be, as usual, worse than what ails /them/!?

THEN, you have as well, the Japanese mentality which is prone to extremes; will they act imprudently, rashly, etc.?

Can't wait to hear the update from Paul Krugman!

In many ways, Knapp helped lay the ground-work for what we see today over at UGA; of course, the most credit goes to a booming economy, and a credit bubble that vastly increased UGA's physical plant.

They also planned and put into action a vast new network designed to influence political leaders and private industry captains to further develop UGA. It is worth noting, for instance, that the new business school will be mostly privately funded.

It remains to be seen, however, if UGA, including the business school, are on sustainable courses. YES, doing what the Ivy Leagues and others were doing (but not UGA, before), in regard to fund-raising, influence-peddling has raised a lot of money and built a lot of buildings. But in other ways, reaching this "critical mass" in physical plant expansion both suborned wealth before knowledge; and operated by reducing resources for faculty and staff while it increased monies for building programs and yes, big-time "revenue" sports.

For Knapp, the Regents, and the governors who appointed them, let's pray for God's divine intervention:

I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:23-26

Anyone wishing to know how to write a column about local issues or practically anything else need only plow through Garland's many op-eds to see how to do it. He has left an indelible mark and a road map for others to follow.

He's not gone, but off at his desk, hunched over a computer with reams and reams of state laws and documents, measuring and editing, and getting things just right!

Lost in the message of unity is a competing message that says we should hold-up and treasure our differences and that we should single-out and hold-up folks according to the media's prescription for a "demographic du jure."

In reality, there are more similarities than differences in wants and needs; yet few liberals ever eschew demographic separatism or realize the entirety of the evil they encourage, overtly or by default. Some, if not most, are well-intentioned; but no "house" stands divided against itself.

Jones' may fail to get the way an arrogant, "separatist factionalism," is still suborned by both political parties. Likely, then, the negative "fallout" from that will affect both parties, equally.

Deal's recent plea to "welcome" minorities to the GOP simply regurgitates a democrat talking point. In reality, though, working people's needs and wants are mostly the same and not specific to their skin color. It is telling, as well, but remains generally un-noted: Separatist factionalism remains the province of a tiny elite who do not enjoy wide support but still support an evil agenda equally harmful to citizens regardless of their race.

STILL, "everything is on the table," regarding the political fortunes of either party; that's called "democracy," and it's still the thing that separates GA and the US from many violent and failed states around the globe.

As with many such reports, the writer should have approached the subject as one part of the ongoing economy. Data about expenses, who pays, and how things were done in the past would be illustrative.

Generally, it would seem far away incidents are now all the rage, locally, in boosting the number of public employees, including the police. In this expanded budgetary and hiring authority, likely public officials, themselves enjoy beefed-up security.

STILL, school officials and not sworn officers are responsible for "safety" in the schools. Checking a hall pass, for instance, ought to be the job of a teacher, AP or principal.

LIKELY, the inability of school leaders to manage their own finances and create "safe schools," are their own fault, and the fault of voters who keep electing them.

Soldiers ought not be the police; and the police ought not be school teachers or administrators.

I am noting strong reactions in this thread among some who already had intense views on practically everything else!

It's of worthwhile note and I will add my observation that an ATL talk-radio host and friends reported they were receiving death-threats at least via email and perhaps through other venues;

I'd guess the reaction, now, must be like the one Sam Nunn D-GA experienced when he as a U.S. senator proposed maintaining the U.S. defense departments defacto ban on "gay" soldiers. I personally know that he was targeted by lots of people who believed he was the #1 Bigot in America and would guess that was partly responsible for him withdrawing from elected office.

In Europe, and especially in France, otherwise "liberal" Frenchmen and women, including one soul who doused himself in petrol and alighted himself, are similarly either protesting the "wrongness" of government, or their inability to understand and accept their own uncertainty about human feelings relevant to sexuality.

I hate to repeat a claim made, above, by other posters, that implies that some of the over-the-top reaction may in fact be demonstrative of sexual identity "conflicts" among posters. All along, as well, I did have some trepidation with regard to the orginal post, myself. If that's a fairly accurate evaluation of the situation, then it would seem "fear of self" and not overt religious dogma may be the real culprit in the death threats, "gay-bashing," etc.

To recount, I called the reform "fake" because I and others knew the BSA had no long-standing tradition of excluding homosexuals either as scouts or as leaders. I did note, however, that exclusionary proscriptions were of recent origin and likely a reactionary response to some groups hoping, I guess, that BSA would finally answer questions about sexual identity that, well, might never be answered.

In the end, humans are left with little to go on, and subject to all sorts of intimidation and uncertainty; of course, that is not likely a "new" thing, either. One might reasonably guess most people are more similar in their thinking than different though that is offensive to the current cultural trend seeking to "out" and underline "differences" in gender, ethnicity, sexuality, and a whole host of demographic "trophies." (I already mentioned my belief that this "diversity" push might be representative of a misreading of the evolution of "civil rights" in American law and experience; it might also be a deliberate plot to weaken our country, our culture, and our ability to defend ourselves from foreign influences and enemies; could it be, also, the bitter-fruit reared by America-hating policy liberals still ensconced in academia and always looking to stir up trouble and division in the hope that their own value systems and beliefs would be finally forced on everyone else?!)

As I said, after this fake reform BSA is likely to keep doing its best to do its duty to back young men as they make the transition into adulthood; those expecting deliverance from their own uncertainties, again, are asking the impossible of public and private institutions. They ought realize, as well, that any "final solution" or writ or finding, enforcable by courts and police, is likely to involve all the negative consequences the other "final solution" offered.

@mcdawg: From "Wiki:" The signing of the Plaza Accord was significant in that it reflected Japan's emergence as a real player in managing the international monetary system. Yet it is postulated[4] that it contributed to the Japanese asset price bubble, which ended up in a serious recession, the so-called Lost Decade

I can't seriously believe Japan will again follow a Western prescription. China, maybe, but only to the extent it wants to be treated as "a real player in managing the international monetary system."

Ironically, some evidence suggests (falling stock market) the new policy push is causing more deflation!

Japan the "Model" for Economic Recovery?

The good news starts with surprisingly rapid Japanese economic growth in the first quarter of this year — actually, substantially faster growth than that in the United States, while Europe’s economy continued to shrink. You never want to make too much of one quarter’s numbers, but that’s the kind of thing we want to see.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/opinion/krugman-japan-the-model.html?s...

***

Well, well! If the U.S. is to follow this model, one assumes we'll see as well up to three "lost-decades" of flat or declining economic growth along with a debt that spikes north of that one in Greece!

But the "new" abeconomics seems centered on a plan to halve the value of the Yen (by doubling the supply of money), and undercut competitors around the world.

How will the competitors fair in the new trade war? This one not made of Smoot-Hawley protective tariffs but of a currency war that starts the same tit-for-tat policy-countermeasures that may see a global death spiral in trade.

INSTEAD of the high-powered "quick" fix so necessary to restore the credentials of failed economists such as Krugman and Bernanke, what about a more cautious, studied approach out to mitigate worst negative effects, allow for fiscal adjustments and build a foundation for sustained economies?

Addressing the University System’s role in developing the state’s workforce, Huckaby noted that large numbers of Georgia jobs are going unfilled “because students are studying the wrong things.”

I'd doubt any evidence backs up this self-serving notion; if large numbers of jobs were going "unfilled," then the unemployment rate would not be as high as it is.

Huckaby's higher education system is not on a sustainable course; transforming it into a "job training" program would be one more initiative better left to the private sector, or business apprenticeship programs.

University administrators are well-served as legislators and the public get confused about programs to train workers, and formal higher education.

Like the debate about public K12 education and "reform" efforts, there, education advocates want more reform and more money while predicting a better economic future for all Georgians.

In reality, not a flagging education system, but uncompetitive policies on trade, labor and capital are the factors relevant to economic decline. Throwing more $$ at education, or even a Coronation for Huckaby and the other Regent's Millionaires, simply contribute further to the smokescreen, and further delay economic recovery.

@avenger: It is important to remember the ban was of recent vintage; always a mistake, (and, I have argued, a "reactionary" response to bullying by the "new" media.) Thanks for your correction! The larger tradition is indifferent towards things that ought not matter.

@Shalmaneser: Labor flows into the U.S. do help U.S. GDP and thus boost our standards of living, but the fruits of that advance are not shared equally; 2013 is NOT the time to institutionalize "free" immigration nor a time to boost that of "high tech" workers who will only come here and bid down wages for our own educated class (and boost profits for high tech firms).

Perhaps free capital flows pose greater harm; but no one should forget the three-pronged "agenda" of the global elite:

1. Free flow of labor across borders;
2. Free flow of capital across borders;
3. Free flow of trade across borders;

Of course, as I have argued, the word "free" needs to be qualified in that "free" means, in effect, developed nations ought be less competitive than developing states; in effect, we have global welfare paid mostly by the poor and middle class in developed states.

In a sense, rising prosperity of the poor, generally, around the globe is a positive development; but raising their, uh, "living standards" to the hyperconsumption seen in the west may require 6 or 7 planet Earth stores of resources. THEN, such a thing is not desirable.

The fruits of comparative advantage, globally, are not equally shared and may never be. In the U.S., like many around the world, income is shifted towards tiny-er demographics while the middle class is transformed into a scavenger class in competition now with anyone risking a desert crossing or coming by raft or jet. STILL our mainstream media -- owned by the top percent -- shouts the "happy news," encourages mass consumerism, and actively scolds and persecutes those of lesser confidence or anyone who dissents from the global agenda.

Not bad links but "Wiki" is composed by who knows who, with who knows what, agenda!

"Such an analysis shows that for most items, it takes much less work time to earn them now than it did decades ago, at least in the United States."

But out-of-work people cannot buy the cheaper goods; in the Great Depression, as well, disinflation made it easier to buy goods if you had the job and wages to do so.

In the U.S. Senate, well-treated technocrats and the wealthy class have gone all "nice" to the foreign down-trodden and no doubt will again claim credit for their "non-bigoted" enlightened views; as "capital owners" and investors, likely they will, as well, enjoy better returns on investments as global and U.S. labor costs are knocked-down by increasing, even more, the supply of needy labor; in reality, they are ending meaningful restrictions on labor flows and they are throwing America's middle class under the bus. Shame on them!

In the end, both of our Red State senators -- Chambliss and Isakson -- will support the so-called compromise; they'll do it not because they aren't bigots, but because they are clever folks who believe the average GA citizen is a rube who could never "get" their "war" on "working people."

@avenger: avenger the overt "banning" of "gay" scouts and leaders came about only as a reaction to demands from those content only with "out" scouts and leaders; I don't think the scout tradition EVER really included singling out members or leaders suspected to have those, uh, feelings.

Much ado about nothing really and a sign of the times; the media-sphere focused on a spectacle completely irrelevant to anyone other than those wanting to keep 'globalization' on track and who think suborning PC technocrats to distraction and the rest of us is a good way to cover their tracks.

Perhaps there should be a merit badge awarded to scouts who discover the real intents of the globalist agenda and the technocrats and money managers behind the whole thing.

I'd guess if Bachtel had his way all conservative, GOP-types would be stripped of power, and he and his bloodless technocrats would finally realize their grand, liberal scheme. One problem wrong in America today is the fact that the know-it-all liberals in academia, having missed not one paycheck in this economy, continue to support policies for the rest of us that do not negatively effect them. They favor the glitter of "globalization" and imagine they'll found a "one size fits all" technocratic global elite that will allow them great power to dish-out punishments and rewards both to dissenters and sycophants, alike.

Doug is at his best creating objective databases useful for policy-makers; but when his "will to power" convinces him he ought to interpret those results and propose policy fixes, he is at his worst. This idea of using financial incentives ("All that I am advocating ...") and public shaming to coerce would-be voters is likely only a small hint of what's to come if this biased, indifferent technocrat gains real influence.

as drought indicators returned to nearly normal conditions in Georgia

The public ought not be left to wonder what constitutes these indicators.

Mostly the standards are lower than those that would be set by a highly educated, well-paid, experienced teacher. In GA, the single biggest contributor to gains in education is probably better pay for teachers. Locally, the CCSD could spend more effectively and actually supplement state pay scales and thereby retain and recruit even better, more effective teachers.

Unfortunately, well-intentioned, often "unfunded" mandates, rules and procedures from afar have steadily drained-away what were budding improvements related to better pay. In well-documented cases, teachers and administrators have made the grades by conspiring to "cheat."

TODAY, nearly every public school system in GA is savaged by 3 counter-productive agendas including separatist factionalism; the "blank-check" SPED agenda; and the "teaching-to-the-test!", high-stakes testing regime agenda.

Only if policy-makers can de-link public education and our declining economy can they make the changes that could actually generate improvements; believing, however, that education is the "only way out" of our economic malaise is wrong and foolish and ignores the things that did cause the distress.

Nice contribution to the debate, Mrs. Johnson!

Parents ought to try and get their kids the best available education, and Johnson indicates that's exactly what many of them are doing!

Unfortunately, some "movers-and-shakers" are stuck on "public schools," or "nothing at all!" Even further, sometimes they may insinuate things about motivations (of parents; and of students in private, religious or "home" schools;) designed to disparage any option other than public schools. Mostly this crowd is the same one so quick to rise-up and dispute ANY and all critics of "public" education!

We have experienced political abandonment of some public schools and there are real reasons for the exodus. STILL, public schools and those running them ought to enjoy some ability to be let alone to run their schools the way they see fit.

The "best world" of education is one that includes the most options; let them all compete to prove which is best, or better. Everyone benefits from that!

Few recognize, or will accept, the fact that effective reform may entail less growth for the U.S., and global economy.

@E.J.: Oh, that epistle was so out-of-plumb and rambling as to have been almost non-publishable.

STILL, in regards specifically to the notion of "out" homosexuals, there is evidence that some activists believe such a personal choice is the only thing that can protect gays, and more specifically, gay scouts. What they are demanding of the BSA, now, I think ought be rejected.

I'd argue that civil rights protections be based merely on whether or not an individual can be identified as human. The idea that we can and will only afford fair treatment to those claiming some special status (Caucasian; Latino; female; African-America; "out-and-proud") seems logical only as a byproduct of the civil rights narrative in America and elsewhere. Historically, we saw group after group be recognized and granted "equal treatment." All along, though, a logical subtext said, "All men are created equal /and should be treated equally before the law, etc./."

The hyper-attention now we see in regard to diverse traits and the public claiming of same as the only way to get fair treatment, at the same time, also fracture society and culture along increasingly divergent paths so that a nation or state or organization can become ungovernable; or otherwise have such a "diverse" membership that the organization or institution or state is unable to work together towards common critical goals. That's a recipe for cultural malaise, weakness, and "blood-in-the-water" evidence proffered to any and all foreign competitors, powers or enemies.

No doubt some would like the American people to think they've lost control of their country and their culture; and our ability to unify and speak with one compelling voice.* In this tiny crowd are enemies of youth, our country, our traditions, our religious beliefs, and of our ability to form our own values, culture and most of all, to defend ourselves against foreign trespass and subjugation. They hide behind a "diversity" front to sow division, rancor; and attack public confidence. They are held-up as "enlightened" when they are anything but!

*While ideas and attitudes normally evolve in all states, there is some evidence that the global paving-over of differences is not about "respect for all people;" but instead about homogenizing denizens in support of the globalist agenda (a plot to transform the relationship between capital and labor in order to increase returns on capital investments; how it works -- leveraging downward working wages.)

@E.J.: Well, our housing GSEs boasted proudly of their work to help minority and low-income people buy houses; this was apparently an attempt to allow them to continue their "good works" including continuation of their own outsized compensation, and bonuses. Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfein also joked that his company was doing "God's work!"