Curious Case of William White – from the Economist

The perverse effects of easy money

The curious case of William White

Sep 5th 2012, 17:13 by M.C.K. | WASHINGTON

With a few noteworthy exceptions, mainstream academic economists failed to anticipate that the global financial crisis and ensuing collapse of output was even possible. There are several legitimate explanations for this failure, including bad incentives among economists and the absence of a realistic financial system in standard macro models. The most unconvincing excuse, however, is that the crisis was such a freakish event that it was—by definition—impossible to predict. Naturally, this became the academic establishment’s main line of defense.

But there were people who had accurately foreseen what was to come. These were not astrologers who had gotten lucky but serious thinkers who studied the way the economy and financial system interacted with each other. They just had different models and different assumptions that happened to work a lot better—a very awkward fact for academic economists who pride themselves on being “scientists.” As Thomas Kuhn argued in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, new ideas are rarely accepted by an establishment that did not create them. Thus the mainstream has decided to either ignore or ridicule those who dared to be right. The persecution of Raghuram Rajan for his concerns about post-crisis monetary policy should be understood in this context.

Most recently, we have William White, a brilliant Canadian economist who used to do research at the Bank of England and the BIS before taking over the Economic Development and Review Committee at the OECD. He is not, in other words, a nut who hides in the woods with gold bricks and canned food. Moreover, he (along with his colleague Claudio Borio), presented one of the earliest and most thoughtful warnings of the financial crisis back in 2003. Anyone with a brain ought to take him seriously,especially when he bucks the conventional wisdom. Thus, this correspondent was very excited to find (via Ed Harrison) that Mr White has just released a thoughtful new paper on the possible “unintended consequences” of actions taken by the big central banks since the crisis. One of its best features is its discussion of the recent literature, including two of the most interesting papers to have been written about the interaction between monetary policy and the financial system since 2007.

Mr White’s central thesis is that central banks affect the financial system much more directly than they affect the real economy or even nominal variables such as the rate of PCE inflation or the level of NGDP. As a result, there are times when stepping on the monetary gas pedal does not produce the desired results. During a balance sheet recession, the collapse in interest income hurts savers more than the decline in rates helps prospective borrowers. The collapse of the yield curve threatens the viability of intermediaries and can actually constrain credit creation. The expansion of central bank balance sheets threatens the functioning of the shadow banking system by depriving it of safe collateral. Instead of helping solve the immediate problem, it is possible that central bankers have actually been making it worse. And, of course, there is the possibility that today’s monetary policy is planting the seeds for another bubble.

Despite these sensible warnings, Mr White never argues for a sudden change in policy. Rather, he seeks to provide a context for thinking about the tradeoffs that central banks have made and will have to make in the future. Disappointingly, the establishment has not been receptive to this line of thinking. They should not be so quick to judge. Who knows who will be remembered as the modern-day Ptolemaists when the history books are written?

Books of note, Economic Systems, Finance and Economics

, , ,

September 7, 2012

Leave a comment

Where Does Innovation Come From – Technology Review

Money Seeks Idea

Businesses are adapting their R&D spending to the idea that innovation can come from anywhere.

ANTONIO REGALADO

Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Oliver Munday

Where does innovation come from? For one answer, consider the work of MIT professor Eric von Hippel, who has calculated that ordinary U.S. consumers spend $20 billion in time and money trying to improve on household products—for example, modifying a dog-food bowl so it doesn’t slide on the floor. Von Hippel estimates that these backyard Edisons collectively invest more in their efforts than the largest corporation anywhere does in R&D.

The low-tech kludges of consumers might once have had little impact. But one company, Procter & Gamble, has actually found a way to tap into them; it now gets many of its ideas for new Swiffers and toothpaste tubes from the general public. One way it has managed to do so is with the help of InnoCentive, a company in Waltham, Massachusetts, that specializes in organizing prize competitions over the Internet. Volunteer “solvers” can try to earn $500 to $1 million by coming up with answers to a company’s problems.

We like Procter & Gamble’s story because the company has discovered a creative, systematic way to pay for ideas originating far outside of its own development labs. It’s made an innovation in funding innovation, which is the subject of this month’s Technology Review business report.

How we pay for innovation is a question prompted, in part, by the beleaguered state of the venture capital industry. Over the long term, it’s the system that’s most often gotten the economic incentives right. Consider that although fewer than two of every 1,000 new American businesses are venture backed, these account for 11 percent of public companies and 6 percent of U.S. employment, according to Harvard Business School professor Josh Lerner. (Many of those companies, although not all, have succeeded because they’ve brought new technology to market.)

Yet losses since the dot-com boom in the late 1990s have taken a toll. In August, the nation’s largest public pension fund, the California Public Employees Retirement System, said it would basically stop investing with the state’s venture funds, citing returns of 0.0 percent over a decade.

The crisis has partly to do with the size of venture funds—$1 billion isn’t uncommon. That means they need big money plays at a time when entrepreneurs are headed on exactly the opposite course. On the Web, it’s never been cheaper to start a company. You can outsource software development, rent a thousand servers, and order hardware designs from China. That is significant because company founders can often get the money they need from seed accelerators, angel investors, or Internet-based funding mechanisms such as Kickstarter.

“We’re in a period of incredible change in how you fund innovation, especially entrepreneurial innovation,” says Ethan Mollick, a professor of management science at the Wharton School. He sees what’s happening as a kind of democratization—the bets are getting smaller, but also more spread out and numerous. He thinks this could be a good thing. “One of the ways we get more innovation is by taking more draws,” he says.

In an example of the changes ahead, Mollick cites plans by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to allow “crowdfunding”—it will let companies raise $1 million or so directly from the public, every year, over the Internet. (This activity had previously been outlawed as a hazard to gullible investors.) Crowdfunding may lead to a major upset in the way inventions get financed, especially those with popular appeal and modest funding requirements, like new gadget designs.

Citizen crowds have far less to offer in capital-intensive domains such as manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and energy. Innovation in these sectors requires investments in the tens and hundreds of millions of dollars. What’s more, the payoff time is more often measured in decades than in months. Yet R&D funding in these industries is also in transition. Manufacturers, for example, are pooling resources with government help to try to gain an R&D edge in newer areas such as 3-D printing.

So what’s at stake in all this? The case of the pharmaceutical industry is instructive. In 2010, half of the top 10 corporate R&D spenders, including all of the top three, were drug firms. Yet despite huge budgets (in some cases $9 billion annually), the industry is famished for new products. It simply can’t get its R&D to pay off. Last year, the head of strategy for drug maker GlaxoSmithKline warned that if the innovation problems isn’t fixed, this might mark “the last generation of R&D spending” for large drug firms. The giant pharmaceutical research divisions, in other words, are in danger of getting cut back and broken up.

The drug industry’s answer is also to try to decentralize its spending. Glaxo is pushing nearly half its R&D dollars into the hands of academics and biotech companies, hoping they have the insight or intuitions it doesn’t. Other drug companies are doing the same, but the scale of pharmaceutical research spending is so big that the shift is taking years. Given the importance of drug research to human well-being, we should all hope they find the innovations they’re looking for.

Innovation

, , , ,

September 6, 2012

Leave a comment

Hummingbird

I took this picture a while back.  The basic image was fine but I wanted to give the picture a bit of punch without relying on saturation or HDR toning.  I decided to try using the poster edges artistic filter in Photoshop CS5 and achieved this result.

Art, Photos, Wildlife

, ,

September 6, 2012

Leave a comment

Mitt Romney Should be Reading This – from Mother Jones

Who Are the Worst Tax Dodgers in Greece?

—By 

| Tue Sep. 4, 2012 11:34 AM PDT

Fascinating tidbit of the day: Tax evasion is so widespread and so culturally embedded in Greece that loan officers in banks have standard multipliers they use to convert reported income into real income. If you’re a doctor, for example, they assume your income is 2.45x what you report to the tax man. If you own a restaurant, they multiply by 1.99. If they didn’tdo this, they’d never approve any loans at all because no one would have enough income to qualify.

It just goes to show how people manage to adapt to almost anything. But why the different multipliers for different industries? TheEconomist summarizes the paper that came up with the multipliers:

One hypothesis is that people in industries which generate a bigger “paper trail”—because they use more intermediate goods as inputs, for example—are at greater risk of being caught and therefore evade tax less. The authors do indeed find that industries that generate lots of traceable information have lower levels of evasion. But they also find another interesting correlation, between the professional backgrounds of Greek parliamentarians and the industries with high levels of tax evasion. Stripping out lawyers, who have a disproportionately nasty habit of becoming politicians, the three most tax-dodging professions account for about half the votes among Greek MPs. That, the authors say, might explain a lack of political willpower on the issue of tax evasion.

Apparently the retail industry in Greece desperately needs to elect more of its own to parliament. A multiplier of 1.27 is pathetic.

Bankers Behaving Badly, Economic Systems, Finance and Economics, politics, Tax Avoiders, Thinking and Intelligence

, ,

September 5, 2012

Leave a comment

Autumn Approaching

It was 48 degrees this morning when I awoke and went down to the street to get the morning paper.  I was late heading down to get the paper and it has yet to arrive.  I will call the Denver Post to find out what is going on.  Yesterday was Labor Day and the paper was right on time.  Go figure!

Anyhow, today’s image is of aspen leaves.  I shot this using narrow depth of field and really like the 3-D kind of effect.

Art, Landscapes, Photos

, ,

September 4, 2012

2 Comments

Justice in America – from Intelligent Life Magazine

STAFFORD SMITH’S BIG QUESTION

~ Posted by Simon Willis, August 30th 2012

Today we published online Clive Stafford Smith’s answer to our latest Big Question, “What’s the worst that could happen?” For many years, Stafford Smith has been representing defendants on Death Row in America, and has also worked on behalf of 80 prisoners in Guantánamo Bay. But his piece for Intelligent Life turns inwards. For him, the worst that can happen is fear itself, which “prevents sensible action, and never inspires it,” and “escalates in inverse proportion to experience”.

In his eye-opening new book, “Injustice: Life and Death in the Courtrooms of America”, Stafford Smith offers a brief but telling example of his point. In 1985 he represented his first client, a man called John Pope, whom Stafford Smith describes as “a rather hapless 42-year-old armed robber, who had held up a pharmacy to feed his drug habit”. During the time he spent with Pope, it became clear to Stafford Smith that he “never meant to kill anyone”, and that the prosecutor in Georgia, where the case was being tried, might take a more sympathetic view of Pope if he spent some time with him. The prosecutor, Bill Foster, refused to talk to Pope. “It was apparent to me,” Stafford Smith writes, “that he feared what it would do to his resolve.”

This is part of a longer thread running through “Injustice” about the battle between certainty and doubt in the American justice system. In his chapter on prosecutors, he notes that in almost every US state they are elected officials. “It is a very rare prosecutor,” he writes, “who runs for election on a platform of ‘doing justice’, whereas candidates regularly boast about how they will convict more criminals or send more prisoners to Death Row.” In his chapter on the police, he says that “law-enforcement agencies seek to hire people with ‘police-oriented’ attitudes”, and that psychological studies tend to define police officers as suspicious and cynical, which “does not imply self-doubt”.

Stafford Smith appeared, when he was a young lawyer, in a 1987 documentary called “Fourteen Days in May” by the British film-maker Paul Hamann (available on YouTube here). It followed the final two weeks in the life of Edward Earl Johnson, who in May 1987 was executed in Mississippi’s gas chamber. The film includes interviews with prison wardens at the Mississippi State Penitentiary, where Johnson was held. Hamann asks one of them:

“Do you think he did it?”
“He been around me now six and a half years,” the warden replies, “and I don’t believe it.”
“Do you think an innocent man might be going to his death?”
“Possibility”.

In the final few seconds of the film, a text appears on screen:

“Since Edward Johnson was executed, his lawyers have located a black woman who was with Edward Johnson in a pool hall throughout the time of the crime. At that time, she went to the courthouse to volunteer her testimony, but was told by a white law enforcement officer to go home and mind her own business.”

 

Books of note, Thinking and Intelligence

, ,

September 4, 2012

Leave a comment

Holy Permafrost! From OilPricedaily

The Greatest Energy Deposit in the World – Arctic Methane Hydrates

By Brian Westenhaus | Sun, 02 September 2012 00:00 | 1

Benefit From the Latest Energy Trends and Investment Opportunities before the mainstream media and investing public are aware they even exist. The Free Oilprice.com Energy Intelligence Report gives you this and much more. Click here to find out more.

A new study out of the University of California Santa Cruz demonstrates that old organic matter in sedimentary basins located beneath the Antarctic Ice Sheet may have been converted to methane by microorganisms living under oxygen-deprived conditions.

The study was driven by methane release concerns from global warming with the idea that methane could be released to the atmosphere if the ice sheets shrink and expose the old sedimentary basins.  There in lies the opportunity –

Arctic
Antarctic Lake Sediments. Frozen lake sediments can be seen in this view of the ice margin of an Antarctic glacier. When ice sheets form, they overrun organic matter such as that found in lakes, tundra and ocean sediments. Photo by J. L. Wadham. Image Credit UC Santa Cruz.

The international team of scientists got its start five years ago in discussions with author Jemma Wadham from the University of Bristol School of Geographical Sciences and coauthor Slawek Tulaczyk, a professor of Earth and planetary sciences at UC Santa Cruz.

Tulaczyk said, “It is easy to forget that before 35 million years ago, when the current period of Antarctic glaciations started, this continent was teeming with life. Some of the organic material produced by this life became trapped in sediments, which then were cut off from the rest of the world when the ice sheet grew. Our modeling shows that over millions of years, microbes may have turned this old organic carbon into methane.”

The team of scientists estimated that 50% of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (1 million square kilometers or 386 thousand square miles) and 25% of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (2.5 million square kilometers or 965 thousand square miles) overlies pre-glacial sedimentary basins containing about 21,000 billion metric tons of organic carbon.

Wadham explains, “This is an immense amount of organic carbon, more than ten times the size of carbon stocks in northern permafrost regions. Our laboratory experiments tell us that these sub-ice environments are also biologically active, meaning that this organic carbon is probably being metabolized to carbon dioxide and methane gas by microbes.”

The research team numerically simulated the accumulation of methane in Antarctic sedimentary basins using an established one-dimensional hydrate model. They found that sub-ice conditions favor the accumulation of methane hydrate (that is, methane trapped within a structure of water molecules, forming a solid similar to regular ice).

Ice block
Antarctic Ice Block for Methane Experiments. Researchers extracted blocks of ice containing subglacial sediments from the margins of different glaciers and ice sheets for use in long-term incubation experiments to look at subglacial methane production. Photo by G. Lis. Image Credit UC Santa Cruz.

It was also calculated that the potential amount of methane hydrate and free methane gas beneath the Antarctic Ice Sheet could be up to 4 billion metric tons, a similar order of magnitude to some estimates made for the Arctic’s permafrost.

The predicted shallow depth of these potential reserves also makes them more susceptible to climate forcing than other methane hydrate reserves on Earth.  It also reveals that the methane reserves could be less complex to recover.

Coauthor Sandra Arndt, a NERC fellow at the University of Bristol, who conducted the numerical modeling, said, “It’s not surprising that you might expect to find significant amounts of methane hydrate trapped beneath the ice sheet. Just like in sub-seafloor sediments, it is cold and pressures are high, which are important conditions for methane hydrate formation.”

If substantial methane hydrate and natural gas are present beneath the Antarctic Ice Sheet, the political implications in store for an effort at recovery could be a Byzantine affair.

On the other hand, methane release during episodes of ice-sheet collapse could act as a “positive feedback on global climate change” during past and future ice-sheet retreats.  That might motivate some action for positive resource recovery instead of an ice thawing release of the methane scenario.

Tulaczyk said, “Our study highlights the need for continued scientific exploration of remote sub-ice environments in Antarctica, because they may have far greater impact on Earth’s climate system than we have appreciated in the past.”

It seems obvious that the Antarctic has influenced the climate world wide to some degree, and always has.  There is plenty of reason to think that there would be recoverable reserves – and the idea the methane is just below the ice sheet seems a huge opportunity.

Still, the right to use would immediately be an international issue of considerable complexity as the continent is not one sovereignty or even several.  Instead, Antarctica is a treaty zone with no government in particular, but voices in the treaty number in the dozens.  It would be great to find out just what the reserve estimates are and get on with arguing out the way to get a deal underway to bring the natural gas and methane to markets.

The research program was a collaborative venture between the University of Bristol (UK), The University of California, Santa Cruz (USA), The University of Alberta, Edmonton, and the University of Utrecht (The Netherlands).

The study was funded principally by the Natural Environment Research Council (UK), the Leverhulme Trust (UK) with additional funds from the National Science Foundation (USA), the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

The next step, if reason were to rule, would be to establish existence and extent of the methane reserve.  Then perhaps, the world could get on with plotting a way to make use of the methane and prevent the methane release to the atmosphere.

By. Brian Westenhaus

Source: Are There Huge Natural Gas Reserves in the Antarctic?

Clean Energy, Climate Change, Environment, Finance and Economics, Global Warming

, ,

September 3, 2012

Leave a comment

Being Tom Cruise – from the Atlantic Wire

Scientology Reportedly Auditioned Girlfriends for Tom Cruise

AP
CONNOR SIMPSON SEP 2, 2012

According to a forthcoming article from Vanity Fair, before Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes fell head over heels in love with each other, the Church of Scientology went through an internal audition process to find Cruise a new girlfriend.

The big audition process is the crux of a forth-coming article in the October issue on the church’s role in the Cruise-Holmes partnership from Vanity Fair‘s special correspondent Maureen Orth. Orth reports the church vetted members of the church in a top secret auditing process to try to find him a mate that was already in the church:

Scientology embarked on a top-secret project headed by Shelly Miscavige, wife of Scientology chief David Miscavige, which involved finding a girlfriend for Tom Cruise. According to several sources, the organization devised an elaborate auditioning process in which actresses who were already Scientology members were called in, told they were auditioning for a new training film, and then asked a series of curious questions including: “What do you think of Tom Cruise?” Marc Headley, a Scientologist from age seven, who says he watched a number of the audition videotapes when he was head of Scientology’s in-house studio, tells Orth, “It’s not like you only have to please your husband—you have to toe the line for Scientology.”

Nazanin Boniadi, an Iranian-born actress, was the lucky girl selected. She dated Cruise for three months between 2004 and 2005. She was put through Scientology’s auditing process for “a very important mission” for an entire month, but they never said what for. Scientology officials instructed her to “lose her braces, her red highlights, and her boyfriend,” before she dated Cruise. It wasn’t until the church flew her to New York for a date that she started to pick up what was going on. Unfortunately, things didn’t take for the arranged lovers. Boniadi and Cruise broke up in January of 2005, and Cruise made his first public appearance with eventual wife Katie Holmes the following April. Things didn’t work out for them, either.

Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author atconnorbsimpson@gmail.com. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.

Entertainment, Humor

, ,

September 3, 2012

1 Comment

It’s Complicated – Relationship Between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama

From the New Yorker

THE POLITICAL SCENE

LET’S BE FRIENDS

Two Presidents find a mutual advantage.

BY SEPTEMBER 10, 2012

Why else would Obama spend hours on a golf course being lectured by Clinton?

Why else would Obama spend hours on a golf course being lectured by Clinton?

  • Barack Obama and Bill Clinton have never been close. Some of their advisers concede that the two men don’t really like each other. They have openly disagreed on policy issues and political strategy, and the acrimony generated during the 2008 Democratic primaries, when Hillary Clinton ran against Obama for the nomination, has yet to fully dissipate. Nevertheless, a carefully orchestrated reconciliation of sorts has been under way for some time now. The former Democratic President, long spurned by the current one, has been given a prominent speaking spot at the Convention, in Charlotte, the night before the President’s speech—a spot usually reserved for the Vice-President. Joe Biden was bumped to the following night, in the slot immediately before Obama.

The reconciliation began in earnest late last summer. Patrick Gaspard, the former White House political director, who has moved to the Democratic National Committee, approached Douglas Band, Clinton’s closest political adviser and longtime gatekeeper, with some suggestions about how the former President might help with Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign. Band, who, by reputation, has an acute sense for moments of political advantage, tried to explain that you don’t just call up Bill Clinton and tell him to raise money and campaign for you. Band recommended that the two Presidents begin by playing golf. The next day, Obama phoned Clinton and invited him out for a round. Several Clinton associates say that this was the moment they realized that Obama truly wanted to win in 2012. Why else would he spend hours on a golf course being lectured by Clinton?

The Presidential round was played at Andrews Air Force Base on September 24, 2011, and since then Clinton has become a visible and vigorous champion of Obama’s reëlection. Clinton agreed to participate in several fund-raisers; he was in a documentary, released on March 15th, attesting to Obama’s sound judgment in ordering the raid on Osama bin Laden; and he recently appeared in an Obama campaign ad. “President Obama has a plan to rebuild America from the ground up,” Clinton says. “It only works if there is a strong middle class. That’s what happened when I was President. We need to keep going with his plan.” Behind the scenes, Clinton has been involved in detailed discussions about campaign strategy.

For Clinton, Obama’s solicitousness is a welcome affirmation of his legacy and, perhaps, an opportunity to boost his wife’s Presidential prospects. For Obama, the reconciliation could help him win in November. It’s also an ideological turnaround: Obama, who rose to the Oval Office in part by pitching himself as the antidote to Clintonism, is now presenting himself as its heir apparent. It’s a shrewd, even Clintonian, tactical maneuver.

The relationship between a sitting President and his living predecessors is rarely easy. According to “The Presidents Club,” by Nancy Gibbs and Michael Duffy, Lyndon Johnson sometimes drafted the popular former President Dwight D. Eisenhower into his publicity schemes, which frustrated Ike, who complained to aides about being used. After Johnson left office, Richard Nixon cultivated him carefully, even sending weekly national-security briefings to his ranch, in Stonewall, Texas, by government aircraft. It worked; Johnson, who was alienated from his party because of Vietnam, mostly kept quiet during Nixon’s 1972 reelection campaign, against George McGovern. Ronald Reagan treated the recently disgraced Nixon with deference, which helped start Nixon’s late-career return to respectability, but the two men eventually fell out over Reagan’s Soviet policy. In 1989, George H. W. Bush recruited Jimmy Carter to help with policy toward Panama; that helped revive Carter’s reputation, but the relationship soured in 1991, when Carter tried to rally world leaders against Bush’s invasion of Iraq. When Carter attempted to offer advice at the start of Clinton’s Presidency, Clinton, with the Iraq incident fresh in memory, rebuffed him. Likewise, Obama, early in his term, ignored Clinton’s advice, which is said to have left Clinton feeling wounded.

Obama, throughout his career, has faced a challenge in how best to manage his political antecedent. Clinton is fifteen years Obama’s senior and was the dominant figure in Democratic politics during the years of his rise. Obama had graduated from Harvard Law School and moved back to Chicago in 1991, the year before Clinton was elected. He made his first mark on Chicago politics during the 1992 campaign, running a voter-registration drive that contributed to Clinton’s victory in Illinois—the first time that a Democratic Presidential nominee had won the state since 1964.

Yet Obama came to share an ambivalence toward Clinton’s policies that was common on the left. In 1996, Clinton, after vetoing two versions of controversial welfare-reform legislation, which he deemed too harsh, announced that he would sign the slightly modified third version. Obama, who was then practicing law at a firm well connected in progressive circles and lecturing at the University of Chicago, saw Clinton’s election-year decision as a sellout. He told one newspaper that he found it “disturbing.” Later, as an Illinois state senator, Obama said that he wouldn’t have supported Clinton’s welfare bill, and he helped pass a state law that restored benefits to legal immigrants, a group that Clinton’s policy had made ineligible.

In 2000, Obama’s political career was nearly derailed by Clinton. Obama was running against Bobby Rush, the incumbent congressman from the South Side of Chicago, in the Democratic primary. Rush had supported Clinton during his impeachment battle, and although Obama’s challenge was a long shot, Clinton helped ensure Rush’s victory with an appearance in the district just a week before primary day. Obama was so shattered by the defeat that he considered giving up politics. “It’s impossible not to feel at some level as if you have been personally repudiated by the entire community,” he wrote subsequently, in his 2006 book, “The Audacity of Hope,” and that “everywhere you go, the word ‘loser’ is flashing through people’s minds.”

ILLUSTRATION: ANDY FRIEDMAN

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/10/120910fa_fact_lizza#ixzz25PWcH8Ya

2012 Elections, Elections, politics

, , ,

September 3, 2012

Leave a comment

Fox Portrait

This fox seems to enjoy having its picture taken.  I was driving by in my car and the fox turned around to face me so I could take its picture.  The lighting was not very good but the image is ok.

Art, foxes, Photos, Wildlife

, ,

September 3, 2012

1 Comment

« Older posts
Newer posts «