Client Web Showcase: Gaylord, Yuska, & Rubinstein

ECS|DC just completed the Web site for the partners at Gaylord, Yuska, & Rubinstein, multi-practice law firm in central New Jersey. This site provides a wealth of information for current and potential clients looking for legal services.

Services Rendered
Web interface design
Strategic planning
Concept development
Information architecture
Style guide development

Site: gyrlaw.com

More Stupid Things Economists Say

So I'm reading an article in this morning's New York Times (July 23, 2006) about the shrinking middle class in many of the larger cities in the United States. The article talks about the trend in many cities to bifurcate economically between the rich and the poor with the middle class being squeezed out. Though the impact of this on the cities in general is not known, many economists see it as potentially damaging since it reduces the advancement opportunities for middle and lower class workers who traditionally had access to the next rung on the economic ladder.

It also points out that in many cases this can cause hardship for traditionally middle class workers such as municipal employees (firefighters and police officers). It is at this point in the article that I read one of the most classist, biased, insensitive and stupid comments from a senior-level economists that I have ever seen. According to W. Michael Cox, chief economist of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Firefighters who want to live in high-priced cities can work two jobs. "I think it's great, it gives you portfolio diversification in your income." Are you F#*&@ing kidding me! (and I understand what the term "portfolio diversification in your income" means)

These municipal employees are some of the most important people we have in our communities. They save lives, fight crime and educate our children, yet this BOZO thinks they should be so dedicated that they go out and get a second job just to have the privilege of serving the community and living in an expensive town. Apparently Mr. Cox has never been in a job that requires you to work well over eight hours a day, doing something that is both physically and mentally demanding. For the vast majority of these people, a second job is simply not an option.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that Mr. Cox's opinion, separated from reality as it is, is too terribly uncommon today. When we have an administration that believes "deficits don't matter," articles in business magazines saying that high gas prices are not a drag on the economy and that the "economy is growing at a record rate" it seems that many people on the upper edges of the income spectrum are simply unaware of what the rest of society has to do to live, day in and day out.

I could go on for pages about some of the impact that I believe these attitudes, policies and actions are having on small business, but I think I'll stop here.

Creativity does not Equal Innovation

I was catching up on my reading the other day and came across an article in the July 3rd issue of BusinessWeek magazine that I completely disagree with. It is titles "The Myth of Creativity" by Robin Hanson, an economist at George Mason University. In the article, professor Hanson argues that individual creativity matters little and that a few less creative people or ideas would not be missed in the grand scheme of things. This falls under the category of why economists should stick to economics. Though many "creative" ideas do not appear to have any impact on economic growth, according to the author, I disagree. Highly creative people, in societies that encourage and embrace new ideas are the driving engine behind economic growth.

Look at the societies that have stifled creativity, the USSR, Feudalism and others have all eventually failed because their creative classes were not encouraged to think creatively or truly contribute to the growth of their society. When you have many creative people contributing to society then there are a myriad of options and new ideas that are constantly being introduced. The good ones become part of the fabric of society, the less successful ones, however, often do not die, but become the seeds of other ideas that contribute down the road. Saying we need less creativity, as professor Hanson does, is extremely shortsighted in my mind and completely overlooks the contributions that lots of creative ideas constantly being introduced make to the economic growth of a society.

Another aspect of the article that I found disturbing was professor Hanson's failure to recognize the difference between creativity and innovation. Innovation is a process, creativity is inspiration and ideas. In my mind you cannot have innovation without creativity, but you can be creative without being terribly innovative. Again, I think this is an area where the economist does not understand the different natures of creativity and innovation and merely lumps the two together.