I’ve never been the biggest purveyor of organic food, mainly because I pay all my own expenses dollar to dollar, so I can’t always justify the higher prices for myself,  particularly the Odwalla 4 dollar little drinks (which this shows as being owned by coke anyway) that never tasted that good in the first place, but these two articles had some interesting information on the ownership and actions of these often not actually organic groups.

An argument for and an argument against the public option.

Ben Stein had an interesting column last week in Yahoo! Finance, called Why This Time Feels Different. He talked about why this recession feels more pronounced than others. While “feels” is a bit difficult to measure I could see his point.

Although this recession is often called the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the decline in output and employment is much closer to other recent recessions (see this). However, Stein’s argument that this recession could “feel” worse than its partners could still be true. Over the years people have begun relying on selling their homes for financing their retirements. Because this recession more than the others hit housing, these Americans have essentially lost an unexpected chunk of their retirement savings. With baby boomers starting to reach retirement within the next several years, this could make a temporary pay cut or job loss seem somewhat less significant.

The Economist recently reported that because on May 19th its citizens rejected the proposed tax hikes and budget cuts, the state of California is now facing a budget deficit of $21.3 billion. (Just fyi, Cali is expected to bring in $82 billion in revenue this year.)

California might be the state most crippled by the recession. Due to the housing market’s collapse, the state’s budget, which drew heavily on property taxes, is nearing bankruptcy. However, the credit crisis can only be given so much blame. After all, it didn’t cause Californians to acquire champagne tastes, it only helped give them a beer budget.

Jack Kelly, who wrote a column just before the elections, did an excellent job pointing out some of the reasons why California’s expenditures are so high. I’d recommend reading his piece along with the article by The Economist, which mentions different reasons.

Last week IU’s Kelley School of Business was given the crown of best in entrepreneurship research. Meanwhile, in a somewhat ironic – but not contradictory – article from the Indianapolis Business Journal, it was reported that the state of Indiana is struggling with entrepreneurship. The IBJ’s explanation was that the recession devalued university endowments, which have been major contributors to venture capitalist investments.

The recession has cost most institutional investors, such as university endowments, about a quarter of their value. As a result, venture capitalists’ primary source of funding has dried up. The implications for Hoosier entrepreneurship are stark.

It seems that even now, near what some economists think is the bottom of the recession, we are still finding new side-effects of last fall’s financial fiasco.

“Doggone it, I’m still in this Senate Race” — the Minnesota Coleman/Franken recount is STILL undecided. Franken’s up by 225 votes; the whole lot of it is about to crash on Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s desk. Less intuitive implications of this could have lasting effects on Pawlenty’s potential gubernatorial reelection chances, if he decides to run in 2010.

BREAKING. Michelle Obama causes a media storm by touching the Queen. Semi-relatedly, OMG I can’t believe she looks that good in J. Crew. Awesome. Thanks, global media. Now, let’s please fix our international crisis.

Wonkish but good: nice blog commentary from the development field on the possible pros and cons of World Bank President Robert Zoellick’s call to the G20 conference for a global Vulnerability Fund, wherein wealthy nations place 0.7% of any stimulus package into what is essentially a social safety net for impoverished nations. Nick Kristof mentions it in his excellent NYTimes column today, too.

And finally, a really uplifting blip about education policy in Uganda. Hat tip to development guru/Yale professor Chris Blattman for continuously good coverage of the economic development scene.

OBAMA IS IN TALKS WITH RUSSIA. SOUND MATT DRUDGE.

…actually that’s not an April Fools’ joke. Sometimes I just can’t resist screenshot-ing the Drudge Report. The theme of the day is “civility,” folks. Anyway, Russian President Medvedev has invited Obama to the country to discuss offensive and defensive arms; Obama accepted the invitation. Politico dropped the story a little before 11:00 today; read the statement here.

G20 update — Obama and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown held a conference this morning (our time) outlining goals of upping regulation in global markets. Obama stated that he was in London not to lecture, but to listen. Because I feel sorry for Time Magazine because The Onion rags on them so much, I’ll plug their link to the story… Read it over here.

I can’t bring myself to end on an ugly note so this one’s next: BLS dropped more private sector numbers today and it’s not good. 742,000 jobs lost in March. Manufacturing and constructing fell as well. Details here.

Less depressing — Seymour Hersh is back! Hersh’s new investigative piece running in this week’s New Yorker, “Syria Calling,” discusses the prospect of a new Middle East peace deal under an Obama administration. Teaser: It’s more optimistic than you might think. Read the piece here.

A growing chorus is questioning Barack Obama’s seemingly disparate policy on Wall Street versus the auto industry. The “Wall St. v. Detroit” tension was highlighted yesterday with the encouraged stepping down of now-former GM CEO Rick Wagoner, as well as the pushed coupling of Chrysler with Italian automaker Fiat in order to tighten the debt belt. But is he being too harsh on Detroit? Michigan Democratic Senator Carl Levin weighed in on the ultimatum: “Their option is either to take a haircut or a bath.” Sometimes haircuts and baths are good. But if these haircuts and baths include cutting the promised retirement pensions to autoworkers who were explicitly promised “If x, then y” regarding benefits of becoming lifetime employees, is it necessarily a fair pitch across the plate?

Next up, financial segue time – French President Nicholas Sarkozy is threatening to walk out of this week’s G20 Summit on the global economic crisis unless France’s demands for tougher financial regulation are met. Still, what’s with the outgroup-y quip about blaming “the Anglo-Saxons” (read: us and our fish ‘n’ chips-eating neighbors across the pond)? That, and he and Angela Merkel are suddenly strange bedfellows in a good instance of camaraderie by negation. Drama at the G20.

Or maybe just drama on Fox News. Because nothing made me happier than the fadeout music on MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ this morning being “Proud to Be An American” after repeatedly playing the clip of Glenn Beck crying on air. Does that look real to you?

Did I say something about strange bedfellows earlier? …did you see this commercial? I mean, it’s March Madness. Strange and beautiful things happen in March Madness – including, apparently, but not limited to Rick Pitino and Bob Knight putting on a jam session in their underwear. What does that mean? “It means you’re gonna have to put on some pants, pops.”

PBS had a really good Frontline episode air tonight that talked about our long-term fiscal policy. I especially like the mention of PAYGO (pay-as-you-go). It carries with it a funny correlation – the only recent years the U.S. had a budget surplus were those with PAYGO. Before it, deficits. After it, deficits. hmm….

Nick Kristof, at the NYT, has been doing a phenomenal job outlining the problem of violence against women, particularly in Asia. The stories are gut wrenching and his work even received a mention at Hillary Clinton’s confirmation hearings. But, his most recent column about sweatshop labor is a serious departure from this excellence. Kristof maintains, and this is a view shared by many economists, that sweatshop labor is the only real alternative available to people in developing countries, short of being unemployed.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats who favor labor standards in trade agreements mean well, for they intend to fight back at oppressive sweatshops abroad. But while it shocks Americans to hear it, the central challenge in the poorest countries is not that sweatshops exploit too many people, but that they don’t exploit enough.

Really? Working for mere cents, unhealthy/unsanitary working conditions,  verbal abuse, forced overtime and sexual harassment aren’t exploitative enough? I’m not even sure where to begin. First off, it may be true that increasing labor standards could increase production costs, which would in turn lead to the shutting down of factories in developing factories. But, the solution here isn’t to promote some sort of race to the bottom. If we can demand various regulations for workers here in the U.S. including banning of child labor, why shouldn’t we expect the same from these corporations abroad? Kristof, like many economists, is unfortunately endorsing the view that trade is a zero-sum proposition wherein you can’t have both sensible regulations and economic development and that is dead wrong.

There is also the moral argument here. It’s pretty disgusting that we’ve reached a point in humanity where we can force people from developing countries i.e. non-whites to work for next to nothing, all in the name of economic development and free trade. This mad desire for profits without any consideration of people’s dignity is precisely what’s causing our breakdown in our value system. What makes this even sadder is that otherwise conscientious people like Kristof actually believe in this sort of madness.