Central Perk

miercuri, 7 mai 2014

The World of Link Opportunities Beyond Bloggers

Posted: 06 May 2014 05:14 PM PDT

There is an awful lot of controversy going around for things like guest posts, with techniques being proclaimed dead and blogs being decreed toxic, but the fact remains that if you handle blogger outreach in the right way, you can get a tremendous amount of value from blogs.

Targeted audiences, run by passionate and receptive bloggers; these types of opportunities shouldn't be discounted. If you take a step back from your link profile, it is very likely to be heavily weighted towards blogs, whether that be as a result of guest posts, editorial mentions, competitions, or just about anything else.

However, while all of the above add value (broadly speaking), they point to a link profile that looks skewed toward just one type of website. Links from blogs can be overcooked, and the reality of being an SEO in 2014 is that it is always wise to diversify the ways in which you get links—irrespective of which color hat you think you wear. You need to be proactive about what your link profile looks like.

We've probably all recently seen instances of overly harsh penalties, websites that looked whiter than white (especially in relation to competitors) getting spanked. I've seen instances of sites getting hit that didn't even look like they cared all that much about SEO, and yet someone at Google arbitrarily decided they had fallen afoul of guidelines.

Do I think Google is crazy? Sometimes, yes. But I'm not here to complain, because frankly it's their playground, so I guess we all need to learn to live in it and determine ways to make the most of it—or face the consequences.

My point is we all have to think carefully about the things we do (even if they don't at first appear to impact SEO) and what knock-on effect that is likely to have.

This especially applies when it comes to content generation and building links. It is easier to get bogged down in the day-to-day and think you are diversifying your link profile because you have a variety of blogs or because you are using different means to connect with bloggers, but from a bot's point of view those links probably all look quite similar.

Here are just some of the wealth of link opportunities that are out there in almost every market:

Resource pages
Forums
Directories
Professional organizations
Events
Submission-based
Press

The sad thing is that at least one person reading this can probably find one instance of each of the above links being mentioned by someone at Google as "unnatural." That being said, all of the above, if done right, are highly defensible and would pass the litmus test of "would I still want this if Google didn't exist?"

Targeted acquisition

The problem (actually, the opportunity, because it means fewer people will bother) is that there isn't usually a surefire step-by-step to finding these types of opportunities; the process can be quite serendipitous. I know that sounds like fluffy nonsense but there is no substitute for really getting to know a client and their market. This is why we often save this kind of activity for several months into an engagement: That is when some of the really golden opportunities seem to appear—after a few conversations with your contact, some research for a content piece, etc.

It is also likely that opportunities are limited in certain markets. There's nearly always another link opportunity out there, but to be brutally truthful this process isn't going to be easy, and it isn't going to be one of those things where you can suddenly make it rain links.

In most cases we have found markets to be a series of rabbit holes with niches, sub-niches, sub-sub-niches,etc.—the internet is HUGE, and if you are just focusing on "Keyword" + "Write for us" in your link prospecting, then you are leaving a world of opportunities on the table.

Resource pages

This type of opportunity is likely to form the foundation of any proactive "blogless" link building campaign because there are so many resource page opportunities out there.

You can really shoot for the stars with this technique, though and we've secured placements on government, academic, and top-tier websites like About.com. I must stress that this isn't always an easy sell, because these types of websites don't link to just anyone so you'll need to adjust your expectations accordingly particularly if your business or client has only a small amount of value to offer outside of its usual commercial enterprise. It probably doesn't surprise you that these types of websites care very little for link-baity stuff. :-)

A common mistake is to adopt the mindset of "I have made this guide on {keyword}, it is really {useful | interesting | identical to everything else on your resource list} and so should be included on your page because it will be good for {your audience | me}". You either need something completely new that brings diversity to that resource page, or you need to sell the webmaster on the asset you are asking them to link to.

A common approach we adopt is to utilize an existing client asset and then look for multiple angles depending on the type of resource page you are targeting. If you think about, a governmental website, they want to help local citizens, so content about things like public safety is of interest to them. However, there is no incentive for them to link if they've already got three guides to the issue you are talking about. If you can find one governmental site that has a section on a specific public issue, though, you can use that in your pitch to another website, offering them a reason to link (because it rounds out their offering to their local citizens).

In terms of finding these kinds of opportunities, there are two main ways we do this:

Digging through an existing link profile (the client's or a competitor's) and extrapolating the tactic from there
Surfacing (often) hundreds of opportunities using a combination of prospecting phrases that include a variation of resource, help, further reading, and the keyword

Forums

Who would have thought a type of link usually reserved for the spammer could be valuable?

Well, a number of our clients enjoy mountains of traffic from targeted forums; in fact, in some cases they are the biggest referrers.

Naturally I am talking about the client adding value to the forum, or in most cases (this is easier if you don't have the client industry expertise and the client doesn't have the inclination) encouraging conversations about the client within the forum. Tread carefully, as most forums don't take all that kindly to marketers poking their noses in, but with a modicum of client participation you may be able to join a conversation and highlight a piece of content on the client's site. By doing so, you might just "turn on" the forum to the wealth of useful content you probably already have there.

Our participation in forums is often content-led, and it is a very low-volume tactic, as there are often only a handful of worthwhile forums in the industry you are looking at.

Directories

A recent study found most web directories are dead, and I wouldn't disagree that most are simply live so they can charge for removal of links. Leaving this type of directory aside, there are a wealth of industry directories and localized business directories that real people actually use. These are the types of listings where you can get phone calls. Regardless of what you think of directories as a link type, that to me is a defensible link that is worthwhile irrespective of whether it is going to have an impact on your rankings.

The US is a gold mine of link opportunities like this, with directories for cities that are relatively easy to get listed on and can actually generate calls and new business. If you are in the travel industry, for example, where people who don't know the area need to book a car service from the airport, they might use a site like SantaMonica.com to find a provider. There is that perceived credibility of being listed in what is an authoritative site in the area.

How do we go about finding them? The Link Prospector tool from Citation Labs is very useful in surfacing these types of opportunities if you use a combination of local and niche-specific phrases. If you don't want to subscribe to the Link Prospector tool, then it is easy enough (albeit less automated) to do generic searches that include a combination of keywords or geographical locations and the directories themselves often show up. I actually prefer the manual method, as it allows for more serendipitous opportunities to present themselves.

Professional organizations

There won't be all that many, but as with directories you want to be thinking in terms of niche and location as well as a combination of the two. Especially in the US, there are a wealth of opportunities with local chapters of organizations that you or your client could join.

There is often a cost involved with joining these professional organizations (at least the worthwhile ones), but the credibility associated with it and often the other business benefits for the client hugely outweigh the cost.

We've been frequently surprised at how often a client is already paying a subscription fee for a membership that entitles them to a listing but they've simply never claimed it! These are very quick and easy wins, granted the impact isn't necessarily going to be life-changing.

To find these kinds of organizations, again the Link Prospector tool is very useful if you need a quick and easy way to find these opportunities. You might find this list useful (albeit a little user unfriendly to navigate) as many trade publications have a corresponding association. Not always, but hey, it is still a useful resource if you want to find out about trade press.

Events

I strongly suggest you read this blog post on Link Building with Local Events by Kane Jamison from 2012. There is very little I can add to this specific topic that Kane hasn't already covered, but a few specific points are worth repeating:

First, why would we want these links? Well, you are likely to be getting links on domains that are otherwise hard to get even a citation from, let alone a link, websites like well-respected news outlets. Similarly the links are geographically specific, there is nothing more difficult than obtaining links from blogs within a certain geographical area, because the pool is often really small. So when it comes to "blogless" link building, it is nice to add that local element to your profile, and event-based link building can really help with that.

Secondly, think about the whole process when it comes to event-based link building, because there is more to it than just the "submission to the event section." You need to consider how you structure the event pages on your website as well as selecting the right ticketing provider (e.g. Eventbrite) for maximum SEO-related benefits (and frankly to ensure a seamless experience for any attendees).

Finally, consider all the angles for leveraging your event for link building goodness, from typical search queries that uncover submission opportunities to looking for footprints within event widgets.

Submission-based

This is an excellent way to maximize the reach of content either through finding or repurposing for a new audience. This guide, whilst painfully cringe-worthy in its analogy to food, is a mostly useful guide to repurposing your content.

I am talking about worthwhile submission-based link opportunities here, though, whether that be making a presentation from a guide to go onto Slideshare or just submitting a podcast to the relevant directory. This is less about the resulting link (Google knows these aren't exactly tightly editorially controlled), but you can effectively plug into an audience that you didn't already have access to.

I still get milestone notifications of a guide I wrote for eHow nearly five years ago. I'm actually a little embarrassed about the content so really must get around to updating it but that has had over 10,000 pageviews since it launched. I accept that's not viral traffic, but it was an extract of a longer piece on my site, and I linked my guide in the section beneath. My guide has subsequently had just over 4,000 visits since the eHow extract was published, which is almost certainly a lot more eyeballs than it would have gotten just sitting on one of my websites.

Eric Ward is a big proponent of submitting content to different places; many of the Link Opportunity Alerts that you find in his LinkMoses newsletter service are submission-based, but often niche-specific and have a large audience or carry some real credibility.

Press coverage

Is doing PR a challenge as an SEO? Absolutely. It isn't always an option, because if your client has a PR department or existing agency you might just end up crunching toes. On the flipside, however, we as SEOs are often far better at actually getting the link than a PR exec might be. We've achieved coverage for clients on TV networks, offline magazines, radio interviews—lots of great things that any PR agency would be proud of, and that started as a way for us to build some links!

The thing we have found is that most press opportunities present themselves and you have to be a bit reactive (or real-time) rather than proactively seeking coverage. We have also found some success in looking at how and why clients (and their competitors) have been covered in the past. Go into this with an open mind—I couldn't believe when we found one of our clients had received coverage for the release of a product brochure; my initial thought would have been "who actually cares besides the owner of the business that our client has released a new product brochure??!"... turns out the trade press cared, and would happily cover it. In situations like that you find an asset which even the best of us would have dismissed as little more than sales fodder that can actually be used effectively to garner links.

Incidentally, I would be interested to hear your experience gaining press coverage with services like HARO. We've probably had 4 successful pieces of coverage from HARO pitches, and while you could argue our targeting was off, our pitch was poor, or the client wasn't a good fit, we've got coverage for those exact same clients through all sorts of other means so it truly baffles me when I see other people cite HARO as though it's a push-button way of getting publicity. Maybe we're doing it wrong, or maybe it's just inundated since all SEOs on planet Earth started using it. Who knows?

A walkthrough

It is often easy to illustrate a point with an example, so I wanted to do a quick runthrough of what we might do if we were to handle link building for Ontraport, a small business CRM provider. These guys aren't a client, and were selected at random after going through a list of a few of our providers (we use them for email auto-responders among many other things) I thoroughly recommend their software, but I digress.

Let's look at the assets they already have that we might be able to work with...

http://ontraport.com/ The software itself is likely to appeal to small business owners, seeing as it has been designed with them in mind. From a link building point of view, we might struggle given that there isn't a free version of the tool, but as a "suggested tool" on a small business website we might have an angle. The better angle here is that the company is itself a "small business" success story (or at least sort of small; they've featured on the INC500 list and Forbes Most Promising Companies).
http://ontraport.com/women/ This one is buried in their footer, I actually found it digging through their link profile, but it is a sign-up page to join an online community for women in business. Ontraport's COO is a woman named Lena Requist and she wanted to create "The Professionistas" to be a community within the wider Ontraport community. It is such a great idea, and is likely to be a valuable asset for any link building campaign.
http://ontraport.com/community-meetups/ This provides details on all their forthcoming in-person meetups. Loads of potential link building angles here.
http://ontrapalooza.com Their annual event which seems to work a bit like MozCon. I saw details of the event last year but didn't actually attend, and there are opportunities aplenty with a large-scale event like this.

Here are just some of the opportunities I came up with after little more than 10 minutes of research:

The founder of Ontraport did an interview on Mixergy a while back, how about reaching out to BusinessInterviews.com?
SBA.gov helped me find an office that supports female business owners that is local to Ontraport and that office has a resource page.
The National Association for Female Executives has setup a page to help guide female executives in their career here. Perhaps Ontraport's Professionista community for women would be a good addition for any women looking to strike out on their own as a means of furthering their career?
Their forthcoming in-person meetup in Santa Monica is likely to be of interest to the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce in their business event listings: http://members.smchamber.com/events/
The Annual Ontrapalooza event I mentioned was held in Santa Barbara last year, so how about telling local residents about it and getting a link in the process? You can submit event details to the Santa Barbara Independent events section (granted most listings are aimed at general public but there are some specialist events in the calendar).

Conclusion

Ultimately you need diversity in the link building that you do. Many of the tactics described above are low-volume, high-value so are worth investing a bit more time in. Can you build a process around them? Yes, but it is likely to be more of a framework or alternatively very industry-specific because there are so many nuances hence why I haven't provided a step-by-step.

I don't think that you should consider blogger outreach or links from blogs to be dead, but as with anything in SEO, there is such a thing as too much of something good. Hammering away at one tactic because that's what's cheap or in your comfort zone is only going to get you so far.

I'd love to hear thoughts in the comments below, particularly success stories with "less common" types of links.

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

2 minutes and 24 seconds of action

Featured

2 minutes and 24 seconds of action

The President made clear in this year's State of the Union address that wherever and whenever he can take action to expand opportunity for more American families, he's going to do it -- with Congress or without.

While Republicans in Congress have set records in obstruction and inaction, the President has steadily acted on his own to help build real, lasting economic security for the middle class.

President Obama won't wait for Congress -- find out what he's done already:

gamer4ever: "The Amazing Spider Man 2 PC Gameplay Walkthrough Part 5 - Spider Ma..." and more videos

Mihai, check out the latest videos from your channel subscriptions for May 7, 2014.

Play all

The Amazing Spider Man 2 PC Gameplay Walkthrough Part 5 - Spider Ma...

2 days ago • 1,140 views

gamer4ever

+ 7 more

Приключение Ашотика: Спасение пельмешки! (Draw a Stickman EPIC)

1 day ago • 13,836 views

PozzitifonShow

+ 4 more

انشاء موقع للمدرسين للتفاعل مع تلاميذهم تفاعل كامل وتام

4 views

MrSoftfun

+ 3 more

Puppy Poop Prank

1 day ago • 79,121 views

Just For Laughs Gags

+ 4 more

How to go on Netflix with HDCP On! - PS4

5 days ago • 450 views

HaXingZeus

Fandub Comedy 3

1 day ago • 80 views

rubodjrmx

+ 1 more

Community

8 videos

League of Legends

Play

Seth's Blog : What's your job?

What's your job?

Not your job title, but your job. What do you do when you're doing your work? What's difficult and important about what you do, what change do you make, what do you do that's hard to live without and worth paying for?

"I change the people who stop at my desk, from visitors to guests."

"I give my boss confidence."

"I close sales."

If your only job is "showing up," time to raise the stakes.

• Email to a friend •

marți, 6 mai 2014

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Fantasy Healthcare Scenario, Reader Anecdotes, Wildcards; Capital IQ Healthcare Report Link
No Fear
End of Employer-Provided Healthcare: By 2020, S&P 500 Companies May Dump 90% of Workforce into Obamacare
Annexation by Force; Three-Part Reality; Actions vs. Words; Paper Legalities

Fantasy Healthcare Scenario, Reader Anecdotes, Wildcards; Capital IQ Healthcare Report Link

Posted: 06 May 2014 09:13 PM PDT

In End of Employer-Provided Healthcare: By 2020, S&P 500 Companies May Dump 90% of Workforce into Obamacare I noted that the New York Times, Yahoo!, McClatchy and other mainstream media outlets referred to a healthcare report without having the decency of providing a link.

Sadly, this is the norm. Bloomberg, Reuters and countless others are guilty of the same practice on numerous occasions.

Link to the Report

Reader Julian managed to find a link to the report.

Please consider The Affordable Care Act Could Shift Health Care Benefit Responsibility Away From Employers, Potentially Saving S&P 500 Companies $700 Billion by S&P Capital IQ.

Here are a few charts from the report.

Historical and Estimated Healthcare Premiums

Employer Healthcare Contributions

Average Healthcare Premiums

Using Its Proprietary Model, Global Market Intelligence Calculates Significant Cost Savings Potential For U.S. Companies

To investigate the potential intermediate to long-term ramifications of the ACA, GMI Research constructed a proprietary model to evaluate how companies might, over time, move away from the traditional health care insurance relationship with employees. This model assesses the impact on both employees and corporate America, benchmarked by S&P 500 member companies. This study also evaluates a more general impact on the economy by including a review of companies that have more than 50 employees.

Modeled results suggest that companies have much to gain from moving employees to exchanges enabled by the passage of the ACA. As companies come to grips with the potential impact on employee morale as well as the potential use of health care coverage as a recruitment tool for skilled workers, the financial impact of limiting or eliminating its role in employee health care coverage will be a significant boost to corporate earnings, especially over the long term if health care costs continue to escalate. For S&P 500 companies alone, hundreds of billions of dollars of expenses could be transferred to employees and to the Federal government and to some extent the tax payer over a 10-year period, despite government-imposed penalties incurred by corporations (detailed later in this study).

Other Factors

Other factors could contribute to greater savings, such as corporations altering their benefits relationship with retirees.

As part of the transition, corporate America will likely alter the relationships it held with retirees. For its retirement plans, a company may see an opportunity to limit its future risks and obligations and rid itself of the health-care-related costs of retired employees that have grown to levels likely not foreseen when the retirement plans were created. A recent example of a potential change is the September 2013 announcement by IBM that it planned to move about 110,000 retirees off its company-sponsored health plan and provide them instead with a payment to purchase health insurance on an exchange. The growing costs of the plan, which the company said made the plan unsustainable, sparked IBM's action. By its actions, IBM solidifies the idea that companies can transfer the risk of future cost increases to the employees while keeping the near-term effect relatively neutral for the employee.

Another change may be a reduction in the number of corporations contributing towards the health care costs of its employee's working spouses. United Parcel Service (UPS) provided an example of this, when they dropped coverage for working spouses of its nonunion workers. UPS noted, in an available FAQ about the change, that the move, which affected about 15,000 working spouses, was because "the rising cost of health care in general, combined with the costs associated with the Affordable Care Act, have made it increasingly difficult to continue providing the same level of health care benefits to our employees as an affordable cost." UPS expects the move to save the company about $60 million per year.

Savings

Using its model, S&P Capital IQ estimates S&P 500 companies would save about $700 billion through 2025.
Total savings to U.S. businesses with 50 or more employees could amount to $3.25 trillion.
Factor in businesses with less than 50 employees and the savings would be even greater.

The major assumption in Capital IQ's projection is the projected rate of healthcare cost increases.

Table of Scenarios

Scenario One: Using the average health care inflation rate of 7.5% since 1999 (according to the Kaiser Family Foundation) through 2015 and then dropping to 6.5% per year.
Scenario Two: Using a lower average health care inflation rate of 5% through 2015 and then dropping to 4% per year.
Scenario Three: Using a higher average health care inflation rate of 10% through 2015 and then dropping to 7.5% per year.
Scenario Four: Using the health care inflation rate from Scenario One but shifting to a higher amount of workers enrolled in health care to full-time from part-time, since companies may be less likely to offer insurance to part-timers.

Capital IQ's model assumes scenario 1 has a 40% likelihood, and assigns 20% to the remaining scenarios.

Is Capital IQ's Reasonable?

Is Capital IQ's model reasonable? The answer is not as straight-forward as one may think. Obamacare itself does absolutely nothing to reduce costs, but costs may drop anyway.

I expect healthcare and education costs to drop simply because the current exponential paths are not sustainable.

Cause and Effect

More importantly, costs may drop simply because businesses do exactly what Capital IQ assumes!

A couple of readers picked up on that possibility in comments to my previous report. For example, reader Michael states "Having individuals responsible for their own health insurance is the best thing that could happen to US healthcare."

In regards to employer provided healthcare, reader Kevin surmised "Employers never should have been providing such benefits in the first place."

Reader Jon noted "My insurance company was billed $22,000 for hernia surgery. The entire pre-surgery, surgery, and post time was about two hours."

The outlandish cost mentioned by Jon is exactly what happens when someone else picks up the tab and there are no incentives to reduce cost anywhere in the system.

Here is another example: Those in no-deductible or low-deductible plans (frequently union mandated) plans have their costs assumed by taxpayers. Common sense explains what happens.

Wildcards

There are other influences to consider. For example, will Walmart or other low-cost companies create more competition? I hope so and expect so. If much-maligned Walmart opened up clinics and entered the business, we could see costs drop in a hurry.

What Happens Next?

We do not yet know the end result. If the shift away from employer-provided healthcare occurs (and I believe it will happen), will individuals be responsible to contain costs (and thus demand better care for less), or will Obamacare pick up the tab?

If the latter, healthcare costs could soar making the projected savings greater. If the former, it may appear the savings were less. However, the reality may be costs are less precisely because companies no longer are willing to foot the bill!

Free market competition is always a good thing. So is individual responsibility.

Fantasy Scenario

Given government programs typically do the opposite of what is expected, there is a chance that the perverse effect of Obamacare is the exact opposite of what Obama intended: Companies dump healthcare, consumers become more cost-conscious because they have to, Walmart adds badly needed competition, and single-payer dies on the vine.

I leave the odds of that happening up to reader fantasies.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

No Fear

Posted: 06 May 2014 01:07 PM PDT

Looking for signs of fear? Finding any?

VIX Volatility Index

click on cart for sharper image

Complacency (in purple) can last for long periods of time.
Fear (in blue) tends to spike and subside.

While the VIX is not at the historic lows seen in 2007, I rather doubt it gets there. If it does, new market highs are likely.

Compare fear (as measured by the VIX) with the chart of the S&P 500 below.

Buy the dip mentality is entrenched. There is no fear.

Should there be at these prices?

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

End of Employer-Provided Healthcare: By 2020, S&P 500 Companies May Dump 90% of Workforce into Obamacare

Posted: 06 May 2014 11:22 AM PDT

Companies did not always provide healthcare benefits. But over time, employer-provided healthcare became an expectation, if not a "right".

That trend, especially with part-time workers has reversed. Some argue that by 2020, healthcare coverage may go full circle.

For example, please consider the McClatchy article Report: large employers could shift nearly all workers' health coverage to marketplace by 2020

A new investor report predicts that Standard & Poor's 500 companies could shift 90 percent of their workforce from job-based health coverage to individual insurance sold on the nation's marketplaces by 2020.

If all U.S. companies with 50 or more employees followed suit, they could collectively save $3.25 trillion through 2025, according to the report by S&P Capital IQ, a division of McGraw Hill Financial.

Standard & Poor's 500 companies could save $689 billion over the same period if they did likewise, the report found. Savings for S&P 500 companies could top $800 billion if health care inflation remains at the traditional 7.5 percent rate over the next decade, the report estimates.

"Once a few notable companies start to depart form their traditional approach to health care benefits, it's likely that a substantial number of firms could quickly follow suit," the report noted. "The result would be a dramatic departure from the legacy employer/employee payroll deduction benefit provision relationship, and could quickly be the modern day equivalent of companies moving from defined benefit pension plans to defined contribution programs."

The transition to marketplace coverage won't take long, the report predicts. Ten percent of S&P 500 workers will shift coverage by 2016, 30 percent by 2017, 70 percent by 2019 and 90 percent by 2020.

Low- and middle-income workers, who already get a sizable federal subsidy to help them purchase marketplace coverage, are the most likely to be steered into the exchanges. But higher-income employees "will eventually be pushed towards the (marketplaces) and will be provided a stipend to help cover costs," the report predicts.

The projections are not etched in stone. Individual companies will decide when and how any such coverage transitions will be made. The projections could also change over time as the Affordable Care Act is amended and modified.

"Whether the current version of the ACA remains intact or is amended," the report said, "the burden of acquiring or providing health benefits is sure to shift more from the employer toward the individual or employee, with varying degrees of support from the government, as time passes."

Here are references to the report, none of which contains a link to the report.

McClatchy: Report: large employers could shift nearly all workers' health coverage to marketplace by 2020.
New York Times: Envisioning the End of Employer-Provided Health Plans
Yahoo: Thanks to Obamacare, more companies are likely to dump health benefits
Politico Pro: Requires login
Advisory: Report claims 90% of employers could shift workers to exchanges by 2020

The articles essentially read the same. It's as if someone published the story and everyone copied it, referring to "the report".

Advisory had additional comments supporting and in disagreement with the report...

S&P Capital IQ Managing Director Michael Thompson says, "We still expect some companies to hold on to their health care plans. ... But we think that the tax incentives for employer-driven insurance are not enough to offset the incentives for companies to transition people over to exchanges and have them be more autonomous around management of their own health care."

"For most firms, there isn't a net gain to dropping coverage for active workers," according to David Cutler, a Harvard economist who was an advisor to the White House during the ACA negotiations. "The subsidies are more than offset by the higher taxes workers will pay"

Report Believable?

Is the report believable? I think so, but I would prefer to read the entire study. If I can get a copy with permission to list it or excerpt it, I will do so.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Annexation by Force; Three-Part Reality; Actions vs. Words; Paper Legalities

Posted: 05 May 2014 11:30 PM PDT

In response to Misrepresenting the Libertarian Position on Putin and the annexation of Crimea by Russia a close friend responded ...

The reality is that the international community overwhelming does not recognize the annexation. Annexation by force is no longer how the world does business and that is what is at stake here. That is why it cannot be allowed to stand. As Radek Sikorski the Foreign Minister of Poland, whose country was also ripped apart and partially annexed by Russia before World War II said, "Do not underestimate our determination not to return to the politics of the 20th Century."

Three-Part Reality

Here is the three part reality.

Crimea is again part of Russia whether the world community likes it or not.
The annexation will stand.
The only thing that can change the above outcome is another major war.

Reflections on World Opinion

Recall that world opinion once said the earth was flat. Was it?

The US had no legitimate business in Vietnam or Iraq. The citizens of those countries did not want us there. World opinion (supportive at the time) did not make either invasion just. Polls today would likely show completely different results on the wisdom of those wars.

Personally, I do not care what world opinion is on Crimea. Nor did I care when majority opinion found it acceptable for the US to be in Vietnam or for the US to invade Iraq.

I do care about the opinions of people who live in Crimea. Overwhelmingly, Crimeans want to be part of Russia.

Question: Who the hell is the world, the UN, or anyone else to tell people living in Crimea any different?

Answer: Not only is it is the height of arrogance to force a different viewpoint on Crimeans, it also risks WW III to impose that arrogance.

Nonetheless, my friend (let's call him F1) says the annexation "cannot be allowed to stand".

Really?!

As long as we are discussing world opinions, let's consider the opinion of US citizens.

CBS news reports Most Say U.S. Doesn't Have a Responsibility in Ukraine. "A majority of 61 percent of Americans do not think the U.S. has a responsibility to do something about the situation between Russia and Ukraine, nearly twice as many as the 32 percent who think it does. There is widespread bipartisan agreement on this."

Do opinions matter or don't they?

Tellingly, opinions only seem to matter when one agrees with them!

Paper Legalities

I have another friend (F2) who also disagrees with my overall point of view on Ukraine. F2 is a lawyer who wants to remain anonymous. F1, F2, and I all communicate daily. We see each other's responses.

F2 commented on F1's "paper thin distinctions". F2 also stated "There is no consistent legal principle that drives these events. It's always power. Eventually the international community recognizes reality. The international community's quasi/legal acts don't create reality."

On that, I am in complete agreement. In time, probably quickly (unless a major war breaks our), the international community will recognize Crimea is part of Russia.

F1 responded "I am feeling pretty good about my position. The world isn't talking about sanctions, and bolstering NATO'S eastern defenses because they see paper thin distinctions."

Will world opinion and recognition that Crimea is part of Russia change F1's mind? Time will tell.

Outrage Over Odessa

Reader Rich pinged me with his thoughts on Odessa and media bias.

Hello Mish
Thanks for your comments on Ukraine

It seems to me it's essentially a state's rights issue since polls indicate that most in the east favor more autonomy from Kiev and only a minority want independence or annexation by Russia.

But where is the outrage in the Western press over the gruesome events in Odessa. There are videos of people shooting into windows while the building was burning and people were trying to escape the flames. Why the outrage over Kiev snipers, but near silence over what happened in Odessa?

Lastly, what has been the role of CIA/FBI in directing / training Kiev's special forces who are attacking the east? Russia is almost certainly stirring the pot, but the US/EU has done so for months and years, and almost certainly continues to do so.

Where is the serious, unbiased reporting on this? I can find a little at the Guardian, BBC, and Al Jazeera. RT has useful information but they are not unbiased.

US press has an unquestioning Cold War mentality and defines things as either pro-Russia or pro-west. Given the complexities and subtleties, where is the unbiased reporting and analyses by Western mainstream media?

Rich

Question: Where is the unbiased reporting and analyses by Western mainstream media?

Answer: Generally "nonexistent". And those of us who present a different point of view are accused of being pro-Russia, unpatriotic, or traitors.

I have several emails from people who hope I am tortured to death for my opinions.

Actions vs. Words

Finally, let's consider the opinion of another close friend of mine, Pater Tenebrarum at the Acting Man Blog.

Via email, also in response to Misrepresenting the Libertarian Position on Putin, Pater writes ...

Very well said!
You saved me from having to write something along these lines myself.

Besides, here are some of the things Putin has said over time. The first quote is in response to the crisis he inherited from Yeltsin:

"During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure nobody would want history to repeat itself. We should also be aware that for during the last months, we have been witnessing the washout of the entrepreneurship spirit. That includes the principle of the personal responsibility – of a businessman, an investor or a share-holder – for his or her own decisions. There are no grounds to suggest that by putting the responsibility over to the state, one can achieve better results. Another thing – handling crisis must not turn into financial populism, into rejecting a responsible macro-economic policy. Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game."

"While a modern state must honor its obligation 'to take care of its population and ensure its social protection' or face the risk of collapse, European countries have been 'living beyond their means' and are now witnessing the rise of a dependency mentality … [that] endangers not only the economy but the moral foundation of society. It is no secret that many citizens of less developed countries come to Europe specifically to live on social welfare."

"Let us be frank: provoking military-political instability and other regional conflicts is also a convenient way of deflecting people's attention from mounting social and economic problems. Regrettably, further attempts of this kind cannot be ruled out."

"We must seek support in the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilization. Honesty and hard work, responsibility and faith in our strength are bound to bring us success. There should be no place for despondency. The crisis can and must be fought by uniting our intellectual, spiritual and material resources."

"Unfortunately, more and more often we hear that increasing military spending will help solve today's social and economic problems. The logic here is quite simple. Additional allocations for military needs create new jobs.
[...] At a glance, it seems to be merely a method to fight the crisis and unemployment. Perhaps, in the short run, such a measure may yield some results. But in reality, instead of solving the problem, militarization pushes it to a deeper level. It draws away from the economy immense financial and material resources, which could have been used much more efficiently elsewhere."

"One must not allow oneself to skid down to isolationism and unbridled economic egoism. ... The second possible mistake would be excessive interference into the economic life of the country. And the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state."

Can one in all honesty disagree with any of this? Admittedly, and unfortunately, Putin may not walk the walk, but Russia does have a 13% flat tax, and that alone is eminently praiseworthy.

Enforcing Paper Legalities

If Putin did what he said, and the US acted in accordance with its own constitution, the world would be far better off. In terms of significance, the latter is far more important.

Obama, Bush, and numerous presidents before them, all did what they wanted, not what was in accordance with the constitution.

When we go to enforce "paper legalities" the world over, we would be wise to act in accordance with our own paper first.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

miercuri, 7 mai 2014

The World of Link Opportunities Beyond Bloggers

The World of Link Opportunities Beyond Bloggers