Here is your chance, yet again, to ask for what you would like. Comments are open.
By the way, I'll be resuming the Keynes symposium Tuesday, with a discussion of chapter ten of the General Theory.
Request for requests
Previous post: Stephen Colbert on Ayn Rand
Next post: The economics of prostitution pricing and prostitution bleg
Next Comments →
Why do people assume that Jim Cramer is smart? More bluntly: why does possession of a JD from Harvard Law School signal to people that they should listen to you?
Surely an economist has some insights into this odd quirk of human nature.
I’m a graduating senior who is planning on taking the much cliched trip to Europe after graduation. I’m also an economics major and, naturally, want to maximize my time spent there. I have never been to Europe. Do you recommend travelling around Europe and seeing a little bit of everything, or is it perhaps better to focus on one particular area? If you’d recommend focusing on one area, which would it be?
I’m a graduating senior who is planning on taking the much cliched trip to Euurope following graduation. I’m also an economics major and, naturally, want to maximize my time spent there. I have never been to Europe. Do you recommend travelling around the continent and seeing a little bit of everything, or do you think it’s better to focus on one particular area. If you recommend focusing on one area, which would it be?
Tyler,
Same question I asked last time:
Do you think that, say, 10 years from now, the regulations will have changed so that, instead of a No-fly list, there will be a May-fly list, so that the government will not allow people to fly unless they’re on the list?
Best,
David
How can distance education be useful? What are the economics of distance education? Why is its adoption actually *decreasing*? Where, or when, should it be used? How is it a complement to, or substitute for, classroom education? Of course there is a clear link here with the debate on “open access”, e.g. Google scanning books.
Can you comment on how the availability of credit affects the price of goods?
More specifically, how much less would higher education (and other large-ticket items) cost if:
- Borrowing was impossible/outlawed
- Government grants and public/private scholarships/bursaries were unavailable
Same for houses, cars, etc.
How about a view of the bailouts as an application of the Coase theorem?
Does economics have any “solutions” to immigration or what are the economic theories about immigration in general? I want to say that I remember that allowing more immigration is widely held as a way to encourage growth but does this mean only allowing in educated workers?
Embarrassingly, I majored in economics but I don’t think immigration ever came up in any of my classes.
I work for state government and deal a lot with people who want to “deport ‘em all and put up a giant fence”.
If we accept that dollars, like all other assets, provide diminishing marginal utility, then does that turn on its head much of what traditional economics considers “efficient”? If someone with a net wroth of $10bn bids $50 for a loaf of bread, while a starving man who has $10 to his name bids $9 for the same loaf, then doesn’t the winner of the auction derive less utility from the bread than the loser would have (imagine that the seller is also tremendously wealthy and gets very little added utility from a mere $50)? How do we reconcile using money as a replacement for utility when often it is simply not true?
1) Why does it take 2 incomes to support a middle class living? Econ is tradeoffs– I know things have been gained (I like the Internet), but surely something has been lost.
2) What do Hanson’s repeated pledges to quit blogging and failure to do so signal about him?
What is the meaning of life?
1. If we are serious about quantitative easing why doesn’t the Fed intervene heavily in foreign exchange markets?
2. Are there serious options out there for people who are inclined to “Go Galt”?
Also, what do you think of this article:
Why is the Case-Shiller housing index inverted?
Why would anyone buy a house now instead of buying housing futures?
What is the most interesting thing that you have learned in the past year that you did not know before and how has it helped you and how could it help others?
Are there any ethical theories relevant to choosing between the causer pays/beneficiary pays principle?
Every now and then I’m asked to do some research on carbon trading schemes, and the point at where economic theory stops is whether credits should be auctioned or grandfathered, which seems to be a moral or philosophical problem, not an economic one.
Comments on the freshwater/saltwater rift that DeLong and Krugman have emphasized. Is it unfair to say that freshwater economists do not have the respect for intellectual history that they ought? Perhaps it is impossible for you to talk about this without getting too personal, but it’s an interesting topic.
What are some seminal papers which are staking out a “new direction” for economics?
A comment on this WSJ article would be appreciated:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123692233477317069.html
In a recent conversation with an old friend, I was describing how unions could cause unemployment, and the moral hazards of providing free health care.
Her response was “…I don’t agree with you on some of your economic views – mostly because I don’t agree with economics as a ‘science’ in general…”
I know her perspective on economics has been strongly influenced Karly Polanyi and others in the constructionist social perspective and the “the world bank and IMF are evil” camp.
In general I think saying you reject the law of demand because you reject economics as science is a bit like saying “I refuse to use a GPS mostly because I don’t agree that the world is round.” It is just not particularly useful to reject something that is true regardless of your opinion of the methodolgy it is typically attributed to.
My question is, how do your conversations typically go with the anti-capitalist, anti-globalization folks you may encounter – and how do they typically justify a world view of what “ought to be” that would require coercive and aggressive force for redistribution, and slavery and exploitation for maintenance?
Thanks,
Ben
I second the previous request for more Tyrone.
Should I read a good book that is conceptually weak (I believe you mentioned George Packer’s Assassin’s Gate as an example like this) or a bad book that is conceptually rich? Which would you rather read?
You seem to read mostly non-fiction. Why do you read fiction, and when you do what are you trying to get out of it?
I believe you mentioned you’re saving listening to Beethoven for old age so it’s not ruined by by overexposure. Are there any books you’re similarly saving?
How about a detailed look at the pros and cons of having debt take a haircut in the banking bailout. Why is the government bailout of autos contingent on getting debt to write down or swap into equity, where the banking industry is an equity only black hole? Is there something specific to the banking industry that hinders TARP from demanding debt haircuts for future equity infusions? Is the CDS/corporate debt market so powerful that they have brainwashed us into believeing that a debt restructuring would be a catastrophe? Let me tell you, from my viewpoint it is already a bloody mess. I think the counterparty risk in the CDS market has regulators hostage, but saving them without debt write down is too costly and creates a clear moral hazard.
If you were exiled from the United States and had to go live semi-permanently in some other country, which country would you choose?
Favorite things Oklahoma.
Can someone today be an influential thinker in the subject of economics, without a PhD?
Arguably, Henry Hazlitt was a serious economic thinker with a lot of influence (do you agree?) but today, perhaps due to the graduate school protectionist racket, one isn’t listened to without a PhD (do you agree?), it mattering much more that one has a PhD than what the degree is even in (do you agree?)
How would you taxonomize music?
As specifically as you can manage, what sectors do you predict the US economy will transition into? (Plastics?)
Tyler–
You mentioned that the freeway/interchange views of Los Angeles are one of your favorite aspects of the city–care to name a few? My personal favorite is the 10-E to 110-N carpool interchange.
Some of my maths friends mockingly say that third rate mathematicians could become first grade economists.Does this comment make sense?
where’s the go-to for dosai in the DC metro area now that saravana has fallen off a cliff?
What is your mental balance sheet on the pros and cons of legalizing cannabis for adult use?
In the next few months we are likely to be blessed with pretty firm proposals for bigger, better, all grasping, all high-faluting regulators for world finance. Regulators, like bank CEOs pose an agent:principal problem. It pays regulators personally to become persona grata with the regulated, and in finance it can pay big. (No, I am not talking about conscious corruption; merely the extra millions in lecture fees, book rights, Foundation Chairmanships – and of course extra prestige – likley to accrue to a regulator whom the financial community admire.) Those regulators will be our agents: we will be their principals.
What sorts of incentives should we give these regulators to keep their eyes on our interests?
Why don’t parent’s take out life insurance policies on their children?
Does any group have it financially tougher than Gen X? We are facing bubble home pricing, uncertainty in regard to social security, retiring Boomers who will use up a bulk of government funds, aging parents who will need our assistance, not to mention the second major recession in our early careers. Yet there seems to be so little focus on our “plight.” Thoughts?
If you have to ask for advice on “Going Galt” your going Galt is unlikely to make any difference to anyone but yourself.
I am wondering what kind of rules the NHL can implement to result in the “right” amount of fighting. There are also a few problem areas in regards to fights that the NHL is looking into. For those of you that don’t watch hockey, fighting is a rather controversial topic. Many fans really enjoy them, many do not. The league has been successful in getting rid of the really ugly things that have marred the sport in the past with clever rule implementations. There is an automatic ejection from the game if you join a fight in progress, and there are heavy fines on the coach if a player comes off the bench to start or join a fight for example.
Keep in mind that players that are known for their fighting abilities are frequently referred to as “enforcers.” They are in charge of policing the unwritten rules of the game. Don’t pick on much smaller players, they retaliate against egregious hits, etc. This is a time honored part of the game, it goes waaaaay back and is considered an important part of the game to many fans, especially up in Canada. The general consensus is that they keep the game from getting too violent. Losing some teeth is a much better deterrent to bad behavior than sitting in the penalty box.
There are several things that are causing problems right now. The “instigator” rule is currently rarely enforced and people are arguing what the consequences of real enforcement of that rule would be. In theory, a player that “instigates” a fight gets an additional 2 minutes in the penalty box on top of the 5 minute major penalty for fighting. Will this mean more dirty hits since players would be less worried about someone jumping them? While fights are usually all about “evening the score,” there is a preponderance of fights that occur by mutual consent right after the faceoff (there are big fines and suspensions for fighting before the puck drops). The powers that be in the NHL want to get rid of these types of fights. The players are not sold on it and neither are a lot of fans.
Another interesting development is fighting in retaliation to clean, but hard hits. Up until a few years ago, unless a hit was dirty, players would accept hard hits as part of the game. Now, it is common to have retaliation for legal hits and people worry about the effect this will have on checking in general.
Rules regarding fighting in the NHL are actually pretty comprehensive. You are not allowed to undress before, or during a fight, you must wear “tie downs” on your jersey to prevent it from being pulled off of you during the fight (the so called Rob Ray rule), you get additional time in the box if you instigate a fight while wearing a visor, you are not allowed to start a fight before the puck drops on faceoffs, you are not allowed to have any tape or other things on your hands during a fight (all fights are bare knuckle of course), etc. All of the rules are designed to make fighting as “fair” as possible.
So what do you suggest the NHL implement in order to eliminate fights after clean hits, eliminate so called staged fights, and generally come to the “right” amount of fighting in the games?
Isaac Crawford
It’s cheaper to study postgraduate economics at a top university in India than a high-end university in the US, but is it better?
hold forth on the poetry of john ashbery
If you’re looking for a good introduction to economic thinking (as opposed to model building), the works of Bastiat are a great start. If more people read “What is seen and not seen” this life would be much easier. That article and many more are over at http://econlib.org/library/classicsauB.html#ba. Scroll down a little and you will see both “Sophisms” and one of political economy. Great stuff.
Isaac Crawford
Unless your child is Miley Cyrus or Dakota Fanning, they have no income and thus no lost future income to be offset by a life insurance payout to dependents. Children have no dependents, they are dependents.
I wonder if it’s different in China, where there’s a one-child policy and no social security, and parents count on children to support them in their old age.
I second babar’s request for more posts examining leverage, like the one about hiring on more lawyers than you can allow up to partner.
I bought Violence: A Micro-Sociological Theory on your recommendation — it was worth it. I wonder if you could examine the signalling issues in what he calls “bluster.” How do you get your opponent to ratchet down the violence while still both looking brave. How do both sides of an army decide to describe the fight as evenly matched. What is so costly about acting “street” that keeps everyone in the city from doing it.
The hockey question above is addressed in this book, along with a comparison to other sports like soccer and football to see what factors increase or reduce the fighting. Ask your library if they can get a copy.
P*Q = M*V; I’d like a LOT more on the velocity of money. It has seemed (when studying Econ long ago), and still seems to be a calculated value, after defining M (M1, M2, M3, etc).
I support Tax Cuts, now, for stimulation of the economy. I claim tax cut cash that is not immediately spent, but is saved or used to pay down debt, is better for the economy mid & long term than Fed. debt used for consumption programs now. But who is refuting or showing this?
Aren’t tax cut cash increases that pay off debt INCREASING that Velocity?
a job for an econ major? any job? (preferably in DC) I will do just about anything (not prostitution)
Dennis Fermoyle, a high school history and government teacher asked on his blog,
[Historians say that spending on WW II got us out of the depression. I hear some economists now saying spending won't get us out of our present situation. I'm confused.] I’ve never heard anyone say, “Look, the spending for World War II got us out of the Depression because….., but the spending Obama is proposing won’t get us out of this mess because……”
If any of you are more expert on the subject of economics than I am–and that includes a lot of people–I would love to learn your thoughts on this.
Just read Bastiat’s “parable of the broken window” for the first or second time (seemed vaguely familiar, but maybe I was recalling outtakes from Jackie Coogan’s performance in “The Kid”?).
Bastiat’s point of “what is seen and what is not seen” is well taken–but why does he give short shrift to the glazier? True, the shopkeeper’s precious six francs have been diverted for the moment from the poor cobbler (who at least has shoe leather to comfort his jaws with) and the poor bookseller (who perennially faces the occupational hazard of low overhead anyway, though he and his brood likely can make out on a diet of hardcover returns); but let’s return to the glazier momentarily.
He pays the rapscallion four sous for his good aim and equips him with a handful of fragments of broken paving stone for irregular but frequent exercises; the miscreant lad spends three sous on candy at the shopkeeper’s establishment but loses one on the way back from the store; this one sou may or may not be found in the muddy street by the shopkeeper, the poor cobbler, or the poor bookseller (my natural sympathy lies with the bookseller, but he’s likely got his nose buried in the gutter of some book anyway). With about half of the balance of his five francs and change, the glazier opts for his own new pair of shoes, and while he defers on a book-buying expedition, his wife helps herself to two francs and change for a new gaudy hat. The couture, four blocks away and an enterprising fellow in his own right, gets an idea of what the glazier is up to and, since he feels vulnerable given the number of display cases and windows at his establishment, pays two francs to the miscreant lad’s older brother to try his hand at arson and put the glazier out of business for good. The cobbler down the street from the burned-out glazier breathes a sigh of relief, since at least he’s sold a pair of new shoes recently to the glazier, and the closest glazier now to be found is fourteen blocks distant; the wheelwright next door whose business hasn’t been much affected by these activities thus far gets two new commissions from local tradespeople in the coming year for replacement wheels and axles at prices yet to be determined. (One fireman sustains burns putting out the fire at the glazier’s shop, but the local apothecary only charges him ten sous for the ointment needed to treat the burn.) The glazier has to relocate to the area around Toulouse where he came from, but fortunately, his modest business insurance covers these costs and then some for equipment and inventory he’s able to pick up cheap from a retiring octogenarian glazier in Toulouse; business insurance premiums for his former neighbors increase, however, except for the accursed couture, whose business and domicile are both in the neighboring arrondissement. The miscreant lad’s arsonist brother dies suddenly in the midst of an absinthe binge; the local mortician has long since outfitted his hearse with new wheels and axles front and back, but he can charge two extra francs for transport of the deceased to Pere Lachaise for burial.
If it’s not always something, it’s always something else, no?
How does tribalism (based on family, race, religion or nationality) affect the economy?
Are there economic models that take tribalism into account or good economic studies of its effects? In particular what are the effects if some people have a preference for improving the lot of their own tribe, or making it more successful than others?
The appalling misuse of computer models as if they were things that tell you about the world rather than being means of testing your premises. See my post here.
That Basel II apparently allowed computer models to set regulatory standards is just appalling.
My perception is that recessions were more frequent during the relatively laissez-faire 19th century than they have been since World War II. Is that true? And, if so, does it provide support for government intervention in the economy as a way of correcting an inherent defect of free markets?
What did you think of The Ladies of Grace Adieu and Other Stories?
I’ve asked this before but will rephrase: which school of economics do you consider most insightful regarding the bases of economic expansion (wealth creation) and what authors should I consult on the subject?
Next Comments →
Comments on this entry are closed.