1. Summarizing a blog, alternatively try the new Alina Stefanescu, or how about this new hybrid genre, starring Megan McArdle and Will Wilkinson?
2. New open access economics journal: "The quality of an article is decided not just by the editors and referees, but also by the entire community of Registered Readers."
3. Tim Harford on race, discrimination, and outcomes, Tim Harford on good looks, and Tim Harford on me.
Harford comments apply to women also. We live in a society where women are told that they have to play dumb to be attractive. Is it true, and how much effect does it have on women’s achievment? Here is some typical advice on how to attract and keep a man.
“First, don’t study with men. Second, instead of arguing with a man, just laugh. Go with what he says.”
“Look, men want to win once in a while. They want to feel like kings. Let him be the king for a bit. If you always have the answer, he will feel inadequate. So let him think he has the final say. Oh, and don’t one-up him in front of his friends.”
The article on race and discrimination is interesting and illuminating. I especially like the purple and green simulation, although by “like” I don’t mean “happy”. It is actually disturbing.
That said, I think “statistical discrimination” opens up a huge hiring advantage to those employers who are savvy enough. First, start out with the notion that M’s and F’s (M=male, and F=female, but F can stand for anyone discriminated against on the basis of nonmeritocratic methods) face different job prospects based on which letter they belong to. F’s on the far right of the talent/skill bell curve are less likely to get hired simply because they are F’s instead of M’s. This means that as a generalization F’s will get paid less than M’s on an equal skills/talent basis. It also means that F’s are less likely to quit their job to move to another employer.
Both the lower pay and more “loyalty” mean that a savvy employer ought to focus a disproportionate amount of time looking for F’s to hire, and perhpas more contentiously, be more likely to give those F’s more on the job training and promotions than an equally qualified M. One of the problems of investing in your employees human capital is that it is permanently attached to the employees, and employees are free to work elsewhere.
Thus, by looking for great F’s, hiring them, and appropriately promoting them (promoting them over more qualified M’s is dubious from a profit maximization POV, but over equally qualified M’s is inspired), the company in question ought to be more profitable than one which deliberately or inadvertantly hire’s “too many” M’s. Not only are your employees paid less, and have less turnover costs, but also are as a group superior workers compared to what you’d get from competing with the over-sought M’s who are in high demand.
It also ought to be more profitable than one which practices affirmative action, with that implying they are hiring and promoting F’s who happen to be inferior to M’s. Note: My hypothesis here is that the initial bell curve for M’s and F’s is identical, and one ought not to misconstrue that to mean that I think F’s are somehow inferior to M’s.
This is not a hypothetical model. In my opinion the Boston Celtics of the 60′s demonstrated this to be a highly successful strategy to putting together radically superior teams. From 1959 to 1969 they won 10 of 11 NBA “World” Championships!!! They did this in no small part due to their willingness to hire and fully use blacks when most everyone else was hiring and using either only whites or mostly whites. Eventually everyone else caught on, and the Celtics dynasty ended when the rest of the league copied their superior insight.
Interestingly, one could argue that basketball fits the green and purple simulation [read the article folks] almost to a T, and many people feel (whether they admit it or not), both literally and figuratively, that “White Men Can’t Jump”, and thus the NBA is now dominated by black players and many white kids simply don’t invest in their baskeball human capital potential the way blacks do in part because of that belief.
I like the e-journal. We all should participate to make it work.
Greetings, my name is Ray Lambert, and I’m the webmaster for sexxxyadulttoys.com. I came across the Marginal Revolution web site while surfing and I think we could both benefit by trading links.
URL: http://www.sexxxyadulttoys.com
Title: SeXXXy Adult Toys
Description: Retailer of adult toys and accessories: vibrators and massagers, dildos, condoms, butt plugs and anal beads, adult bedroom accessories…more
Just email me back with your info, and let’s see if our sites are compatible for link trading. I look forward to hearing from you.
Ray Lambert
R.D. Lambert Group (SeXXXy Adult Toys)
Webmaster
raynetjp@mts.net
Comments on this entry are closed.