Mediaboss Marketing

The United States is fighting wars on multiple fronts. Aside from our involvement in Ukraine and the Middle East, a hot war is being waged against economics. This war is being championed by the progressives in the Democrat Party, backed in large part by left-wing sociologists and political scientists. Progressives deny basic economic principles and theory. They deny that incentives matter, that markets work better than government dictates, that scarcity and opportunity costs exist, that the laws of supply and demand are operative, that benefit-cost analyses have merit, and that economic efficiency makes consumers and producers better off.

Incentives matter. Remove penalties for looting and carjacking and more looting and carjackings occur. Establish sanctuary cities and free college tuition for illegal immigrants and expect increased flows of illegals crossing the border. Increase compensation for the unemployed and more unemployment occurs. To deny that incentives matter is to deny inductive and deductive logic. Progressives admittedly march to the music of a different logic. What the tune is isnt clear.

Scarcity means that resources are limited. Getting more of something requires having less of something else. Economists call the best alternative use of resources its opportunity cost. Larry Summers, the well-respected Democratic economist and former secretary of the treasury, wondered if the billions of dollars proposed to be given to individuals who have college debt might be better spent elsewhere (or perhaps not spent at all). His question was roundly ignored by progressives.

Understanding opportunity cost is essential for rational decision-making. Imagine a family operating without regard to opportunity cost. Little Sally might be given her hearts desire while the rest of her family goes without food. No rational family would operate like this. Nor should any nation.

Government commands destroy the benefits from markets. Progressives despise markets. Markets privately allocate resources based on supply and demand through which the costs of production and consumer preferences interact to set prices and efficient levels of output. Progressives think markets produce the wrong things. The old Soviet Union and Chinese command economies announced five-year plans that dictated the production of nearly everything (including the number of nails). Shortages, inefficiency, and economic stagnation followed. Thinking that the geniuses in Washington know best how to allocate resources will set us on the same road.

Economic efficiency raises living standards. Progressives think efficiency is a dirty word. They either dont understand the concept or choose to neglect it because it interferes with support for their public-policy whims. Economic efficiency incorporates a number of basic concepts, and an important one is to avoid producing something that costs more in resources than the value of the final product. Markets generally take care of this. If progressives want something, they dont care how much it costs or how wasteful it is. Take the Green New Deal, for example.

If progressives deny economics, what criteria do they use for decision-making? They rely heavily on the vaguely defined concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-acknowledged socialist and progressive, was recently asked by Bill Maher to define equity. He was stumped. It is best not to define terms that will get you into obvious contradictions. Take the proposed forgiveness of college debt. How does this square with the diversity, equity, and inclusion criteria? It more than smacks of a crass giveaway to buy votes.

The University of Michigan sociologist Elizabeth Popp Berman acknowledges the war against economists and their way of thinking. In her book, Thinking Like an Economist: How Efficiency Replaced Equality in U.S. Public Policy, she claims that economists are the chief obstacles to achieving progressive policies. She hopes that the progressives in Congress will be joined by a range of experts and activists including economists not committed to the economic style [of thinking]. However, is it reasonable to call someone who does not think like an economist an economist?

To be clear, economists can disagree on public policy. But the economic way of thinking allows for a rational debate. Professor Berman is correct that the economic way of thinking has been a chief obstacle to progressive policies. It has saved us from traveling down F. A. Hayeks road to serfdom.

Read more from the original source:
Progressives Are Declaring War on Basic Economics: News: The ... - The Beacon

As Maharashtra celebrates its 63rd Foundation Day, some politicians in the state are causing controversy over the location of a petroleum refinery at Barsu village in the Sindhudurga district. Nothing highlights the hypocrisy and doublespeak of the Shiv Sena, the principal opposition party in the state, more vividly than this. A forward-looking Maharashtra is being forced to close doors to development and take the path of negativism.

One wonders what happened to its much-touted legacy of progressivism. Maharashtra was once known for intellectual giants such as Lokmanya Tilak, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, and C D Deshmukh, social reformers like Mahatma Phule, builders of institutions that revolutionised popular thinking like Dr Hedgewar, Vinoba Bhave, Maharshi Karve and Vithal Ramji Shinde, freedom fighters like VD Savarkar, and politicians like YB Chavan. Recently, Maharashtra seems to be struggling to provide truly honest intellectual leadership.

The reasons for this decline are not far to seek. Firstly, the virus of hypocrisy has seriously afflicted the thinking circles in the state. Not a single politician or social leader who takes pride in Maharashtra's progressive legacy ever forgets to mention that this is the land of Phule, Shahu Maharaj, and Ambedkar. For many, merely mentioning these names has served as an umbrella to hide all their undemocratic, feudalistic, and even obscurantist acts.

It was the era of post-Mahatma Gandhi's assassination that saw the sowing of the seeds of hypocrisy in Maharashtra's politics. The riots and arson, plunder and loot that were witnessed in the state immediately after Gandhi's dastardly assassination met with only feeble condemnation. Selective amnesia and recognising only convenient facts were to become almost permanent ingredients of the approaches of most in the political class in Maharashtra, later!

Many from this so-called progressive cabal have closed their eyes when intellectual untouchability and thought-apartheid ruled the roost. Otherwise, known for tom-tomming about freedom of expression, they chose to look the other way when PB Bhave, a literary giant, was almost thrown out of the Marathi Sahitya Sammelan held immediately after the Emergency. All of a sudden, their liberal values vanished when Ramesh Patange, a senior RSS leader and author, was not allowed to speak at a seminar held by progressives where he was an invited speaker. They were tight-lipped when a needless controversy was manufactured on the subject of Maharashtra Bhushan to be given to historian Babasaheb Purandare. When it comes to politics of hurt emotions, these tsars and tsarinas of Marathi progressivism have always taken a religion-specific approach and silently watched the gagging of the likes of Taslima Nasrin. The duplicity of their approach came to the fore when they remained silent on the ban of the Satanic Verses and created a brouhaha over a complaint against the famous Ghashiram Kotwal, decades before, both cases of alleged hurting of emotions!

What is more appalling is the progressive cabal's willingness to crawl in front of the Thackerays when, in fact, they are asked to bend. Today, whatever remains of the so-called Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA), parties that had opposed the ban on Ambedkar's Riddles in Ramayana have joined hands with those who had advocated the same from the rooftop. Shiv Sena politics was always known as anti-democratic. Balasaheb Thackeray had defended the infamous Emergency of 1975. Besides the party's openly anti-South Indian or anti-Gujarati positions and the Robin Hood brand of politics, which is many times fuelled by protection money mechanisms, there are many aspects of Shiv Sena's style of functioning that no genuine progressive would ever accept. However, simply to cater to their own pathological hatred of RSS and BJP, progressives have been turning a blind eye to Shiv Sena's uncivil activism.

Throughout these years, Marathi progressives have developed a ghettoised mindset. With thought apartheid top of mind, most of them refuse to be seen in the company of a Sanghwala, deny recognition to any artist, litterateur, or journalist with an RSS background, and totally ignore the number of social work projects started by RSS persons. In the land of Phule-Shahu-Ambedkar, the progressives have promoted crass intellectual untouchability, and that too in the name of those who were true epitomes of all liberal values. All this puts a big question mark on Maharashtra's ability to provide thought leadership to the nation.

Thanks to the complete politicisation of the creative and intellectual spheres, dominant sections of the traditional thought leadership of Maharashtra pose a much more serious threat to those who do not subscribe to their brand of progressivism. From theatre to cinema, music to literature, and education to media, these pseudo-progressives try to corner every other recognition and call names when persons opposed to their brand of progressivism are decorated by some award. More often than not, this pseudo-progressive cabal seems to be thriving on a 'you-scratch-my-back; I-will-scratch-your-back' principle. While mutual obligation mechanisms have helped them sustain their grip, the loss of objectivity and non-partisan approach has cost the thinking circles heavily.

In contrast, the approach of RSS towards this needless ideological polarisation and untouchability deserves mention. Firstly, many in RSS recognise unhesitatingly that even beyond RSS, there are many honest and passionate social workers serving society. Secondly, RSS has always tried to build bridges across ideologies. Many, not subscribing to the RSS view in its entirety, have routinely graced the Vijaya Dashmi function as Chief Guests. No gatherings of the so-called progressives have ever seen an avowedly RSS person being invited to grace and given respect.

What is more deplorable is the fact that this thought apartheid has led to a near-total demise of authentic journalism. It has become fashionable to talk about what they call "Godi-Media" today. In reality, many media persons in Maharashtra seem to toe the line of Shiv Sena. Generally speaking, whether in power or opposition, Shiv Sena continues to influence not just the news but also the edit pages of key print-media publications. So much so that the popular impression of journalists indulging in a different kind of politics, including that of vocabulary, punctuation, headlines, and placement of news items, is gaining ground with every passing day.

Apart from being caught in the web of politics of fear and crass partisanship, Maharashtra also seems to be in the grip of the politics of patronage. Movie directors, theatre artists, and quite a few men of letters have been, although obliquely, given a clear message that to wear a badge of progressivism, you have to be anti-RSS and BJP. Not just that, those obliged by the progressive echo system are made to see no wrong in dynastic politics, open threats of violence given by some 'upcoming' leaders or denigration of Veer Savarkar. The silence of a powerful section of opinion makers on issues like sugar barons exploiting sugarcane growers, or diverting waters from particular dams to select areas in an unjust manner, speaks volumes.

With the spirit of accommodation now shrinking, the days of a genuine exchange of thoughts and ideas have become a thing of the past. The trio of Phule, Shahu, and Ambedkar must be cursing all those who swear by them and behave exactly opposite to their ideals.

Vinay Sahasrabuddhe is former MP, Rajya Sabha and columnist, besides being President of Indian Council of Cultural Relations (ICCR)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.

Waiting for response to load...

Go here to see the original:
Opinion: The Hypocrisy Of Maharashtra's Progressives - NDTV

New You can now listen to Insurance Journal articles!

Despite posting a year-over-year net income increase of 45%, Progressive Corp. shared first quarter financial results on Tuesday that showed the company falling short of its combined ratio goal for 2023.

The firms CR for the quarter was 99 with March alone posting a CR of 106.2 while the companys profit objective is to have a calendar year CR of 96.

Through the first quarter, were not on track to achieve our calendar year goal of a 96 combined ratio, Tricia Griffith, President and CEO of Progressive, said in an earnings call. Given our extensive history of meeting our stated goal, this has prompted many questions about how we got here and where were going.

Factors in continued elevated loss costs included inflationary pressure, reserving development, additional weather-related losses as well as recent law changes in Florida that impacted loss estimates and prompted increases to Progressive reserves.

Loss severity was up nearly 10% compared to the first quarter of 2022. Prior accident year reserves developed 4.6 points on the companywide CR and catastrophe losses contributed 1.8 points to that number, compared to 1.2 points for the same period last year.

Griffiths letter to shareholders says that Progressive is re-evaluating rate plans and intends to be aggressive with raising rates over the remainder of the year. In addition, course-correcting action is being taken to reduce advertising spending. By tightening verification, underwriting standards and limiting bill plan options, Progressive aims to reduce growth in segments company leadership believe cannot be written at the target margin.

Record Growth

First quarter growth reached an all-time high for the company, Griffith said.

Companywide net premiums written totaled $16.1 billion a growth of 22% compared to Q1 2022 and policies in force growth was 9%. Progressives net income of $450 million was up 45% from the $310,000 million reported in the first quarter of last year.

The companys personal lines business grew but fell short of the profitability target with a CR of 98.7 for the quarter. NPW grew 25%, with policies in force growth of 10%. Commercial lines grew NPW 15% with a CR of 98.4.

While policy growth may be slowed by Progressives actions, Griffith said we are focused on growing policies that we believe will meet or exceed our target margins.

Catch Up Quick

Progressive reported first quarter net income of $450 million, though the insurer booked a nearly $152 million loss for the month of March.

At the end of February, Progressive recorded net income of about $150.3 million for the month, with nearly $600 million of net income for the year as of Feb. 28.

The downturn in March, Progressive explained, was due to unfavorable prior-year reserve development of $146.5 million during the month about 55% attributable to its personal auto product and a majority from recently passed legislation in Florida, said the insurer.

Some of the unfavorable development in March is from higher than anticipated severity on previously closed claims, Progressive said.

In addition, commercial auto products represented about 30% of the unfavorable development for March due mainly to late reported claims and changes in reserve estimates.

Get the insurance industry's trusted newsletter

Follow this link:
Progressive Falls Short of Goal in Q1 - Insurance Journal

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Friday, May 5th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. Im Myrna Brown.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And Im Nick Eicher. A quick comment about yesterdays interview with Erin Hawleysenior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom and WORLD Opinions contributor.

During our interview she referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. In the spirit of full disclosure, we missed an opportunity to let the listener know that Hawleys husbandSenator Josh Hawleyserves on that committee. We should have mentioned that. We didnt. So we are now.

BROWN: All right, time now for Ask the Editor. Today, we answer a recent listener question about how we occasionally identify a particular political ideologyand those who hold it. Heres WORLD Radio Executive Producer Paul Butler.

PAUL BUTLER: Before I get to todays question, I want to start by playing a soundbite of Al Sharpton from April 13th. It provides some necessary context to todays question. Sharpton was speaking at the National Action Network conference:

SHARPTON: We gotta stop using progressive as a noun and use it as an adjective. Your label is progressive but your action is regressive.

I hadnt heard this clip until a couple weeks ago, when I read this note from listener Michael Mosley:

Even Al Sharpton has figured out that so-called progressives are not progressive. So when is WORLD going to stop calling them progressive? They're more like regressive.

Ill admit I was a little defensive when I first read the noteyou see, our WORLD Radio style guide includes this encouragement for us as reporters and editors:

The term progressive should be avoided, except when its part of the proper name of an organization. The term suggests that one faction supports progress and its opponents are against progress.

So I was ready to fire off that response when I thought: perhaps I should do a quick search of our recent transcripts first. I didnt expect to get many returns, but was surprised to find out that the terms been used quite a few times recently. Here are four examples:

STEVE WEST: But the larger issue is whether Disney knows its audience well enough, it needs to hear from shareholders concerned about its foray into progressive gender ideology and its films

JULIANNA ERICKSON: And so Somerville is a fairly progressive liberal city

CAL THOMAS: with the goal being a good education, not fulfilling some secular progression, objective of diversity

KATIE MCCOY: The UK, Sweden, and Finland are all countries that have been very progressive about transgender therapies for minors. They are reversing course in our own cultural psyche. We tend to believe that all change is progress and all progress is good

I think its clear in all four clips that were not using the term positivelyin fact, I like what Katie McCoy saidnot all change is actually progress. So I think most of you understand exactly what were saying when we use the term: progressive.

But that doesnt change the fact that our style guide discourages us from using the term. So I decided to bring the topic up during this weeks Editorial Council meeting.

Heres a few highlights of that conversation:

MICKEY: It's kind of a euphemism to me. To me it's just kind of a namby-pamby way of calling a liberal a liberal.

TIM: But theyre not liberal.

MICKEY: Not in the classic sense, no.

NICK: And thats the problem.

TIM: I prefer progressive to liberal because they're not liberal. And I do think that progress is how they think of their ideology. Just as a conservative belief in conserving something that, that sort of seems like the opposite of conserving is, is moving forward...

NICK: It's sort of the bad politics version of being reformed, you know, always reforming, they're always progressing, but progressivism, there's no limit to it.

LYNDE: Ive told my writers instead of saying progressive, lets reference what belief is relevant to the story

Proverbs 11:14 and 24:6 both teach that in a multitude of counselors there is safety. Thats really thethe purpose of our weekly meetings: to discern together what is best when it comes to questions like this one.

Albert Mohler doesnt sit on our editorial council, but as the executive editor of WORLD Opinions, I thought it would be helpful to hear what he had to say:

ALBERT MOHLER: Writing is about communication and communication requires accurate but reductive language. For the WORLD Opinions side I simply have to say that if we avoid using the language currently employed in the larger culture, we would make no sense to ourselves or to others.

I will say that there is no way to write editorial content without using words like conservative, liberal, progressive/progressivist, and, occasionally, reactionary. The same holds for left, right, and center. Again, each contains a thousand arguments.

The listener makes a moral point but, if adopted, his proposal would mean that no reader will be able to understand our eccentric vocabulary.

Now you should know that we are in the process of updating our WORLD Policy Handbook and style guide for the first time since 2019, so this is an ongoing discussion that were addressing for the upcoming edition. But the growing consensus within our current editorial leadership is that we must avoid using the term progressive if its merely covering for sloppy reportingthats true of any label.

But as Albert Mohler rightly points out there are times when the term progressive is appropriateshorthand for identifying those who desireas Tim Lamer saidto move beyond Biblical truth and traditional values. Or as Nick Eicher pointed out, for those who only wish to progress to the next restraint in order to cast it off. And that brings us back to what Mickey Mclean suggested, that sometimes we need the courage to use more accurate termscalling a spade a spade

Finally we acknowledge that the term progressive is abstract. So, as Lynde Langdon said, if we can identify the specific belief in question instead it will make our stories more concrete more clear and frankly better.

So Michael, thanks for the questionits provided a great opportunity for our editors to discuss it, and bear with us as we make progress toward a unified answer.

Im Paul Butler.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.

Read the original here:
Ask the Editor: Why use the term progressive? - WORLD News Group

Views expressed in opinion columns are the authors own.

How does Wes Moore make you feel?

When you saw his brightly-colored logo on billboards or heard his enthusiastic tone in campaign ads, did it make you feel hopeful for Marylands future? If you were anything like one-third of Democratic gubernatorial primary voters or two-thirds of this states voters in November Moores brand won you over. Our states next senator will need a progressive brand like Moores to win.

In this case, branding is not just about logo design or social media aesthetic, although thats certainly part of it. Every candidate in American political history had a brand that was defined by how people viewed them. Some of these brands came with taglines.

Remember Tippecanoe and Tyler too? No? How about, Make America Great Again? The aggressive, vaguely-patriotic slogan summed up Donald Trumps whole brand in four words.

Marylands gubernatorial primary last year had three main candidates: state Comptroller Peter Franchot, former Secretary of Labor Tom Perez and Moore.

Of those three, only Moores campaign had a slogan: Leave No One Behind.

This catchphrase, combined with Moores youth and boundless charisma, formed a winning brand and helped him overcome his relative lack of political experience. Summed up in a word, the brand was progressive.

Design-wise, progressive brands in politics have included vibrant blues and sans-serif block lettering. Minimalist logo designs have found success in recent years, with Obamas O providing a blueprint for future Democratic candidates.

Obamas inspiring message evoked a feeling in voters that catapulted him into the White House: hope. After his election, Americans view of race relations reached a high point, international opinion of the country improved and the electorate diversified racially. A unifying brand centered on change and optimism, as evidenced by his presidency, makes our country stronger.

With the nations hope invested in a candidate, their mandate becomes impenetrable. Marylands next senator can capture this progressivism to instill hope in their constituents.

Moores high approval rating goes hand-in-hand with a majority of Marylanders characterizing Moore as progressive. In contrast, moderate President Joe Bidens approval in Maryland is seven points lower than Moores. Its clear that, in Maryland, progressivism sells.

Progressives have dominated Marylands political scene, which boast some of the bluest waves in the country. Campaigns setting sail this cycle must heed the winds of change, which blow firmly to the left as Generation Z floods the scene.

Progressive branding will guide legislative candidates into Senate seats, one of which will be vacated by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) in 2024.

Over his 58 years campaigning and serving in the government, Cardin has formed a brand centered on moral integrity, character and accomplishment. While these are noble traits to aspire to, Cardins outdated branding is falling out of style with younger voters.

Another prominent, older legislator, 89-year-old Dianne Feinstein, is currently facing calls to resign amid an extended leave of absence that has left Democrats shorthanded. Nationally, the median age of the American population is 38, while the median age of Congress members is two decades older.

Looking for an alternative, Maryland voters seem likely to flock to older politicians opponents. Cardins eventual replacement may lack in experience and rapport, but would make up for it with charisma, modernity and a forward-thinking brand.

As the crowd of Democratic candidates for the coveted seat gets bigger, candidates may have a difficult time standing out. With many candidates agreeing on core political values, voters may end up choosing based on vibes alone. In politics, vibes are simply the results of a carefully-curated brand forged by highly-paid professionals. Public perception will decide the winner, and branding will decide public perception before the race even begins.

Furthermore, if these candidates fail to separate from one another, a fractured Democratic base could be an opportunity for Republicans to swoop in. Even though their party garnered less than one-third of the gubernatorial vote last year, a Republican could use modern branding to whittle away the 24 percent gap between Republican and Democratic voters in Maryland.

Marylanders deserve a senator that can show the country what we offer: a model for the equitable policies that our nation desperately needs. The candidate who embraces this people-focused, progressive approach will emerge from the Democratic crowd and unite our state under their brand.

Joey Barke is a sophomore government and politics and journalism major. He can be reached at joey@terpmail.umd.edu

Read the original:
Maryland's next senator will need a distinctive progressive brand - The Diamondback