Assorted links

by on April 17, 2012 at 12:11 pm in Uncategorized | Permalink

1. The hug a Coca-Cola vending machine advertising campaign that is Singapore.

2. U. Michigan economics Ph.d student running for Congress, web site here.

3. Annie Lowrey profile of Piketty and Saez, and here is a list of French economists supporting Hollande, Piketty is on the list, via CFM.

4. Walrasian bar pricing.

5. Via Chris F. Masse, “The revolutionary calculator that shows the answer only when you also enter a suitable mental estimate.”

Alex Godofsky April 17, 2012 at 12:23 pm

4. I suspect that benefit is from price discrimination rather than helping “level out inventory” per the article.

Rahul April 17, 2012 at 4:28 pm

Another reason is to tap the strong urge in most consumers of not missing out on a deal. People who may not otherwise buy that last beer probably will when it is advertised as a momentary steal.

The idea isn’t novel though. I remember “State Street Brats” in Madison, WI used to have a weekly “Beer Stock Exchange” night a couple of years ago. Think they stopped it because the ran foul of the city alcohol commission.The University complained that the scheme encouraged binge drinking. So far as I could tell, the gimmick did attract the drinking hordes, but then again that’s just Wisconsin.

In any case shouldn’t it lead to a more efficient price-discovery mechanism than regular pricing?

jimi April 17, 2012 at 12:34 pm

4) that’s stupid. if someone at the bar hasn’t order a certain type of drink, why would you encourage them to order it?

If you’re on a role making 30 martinis, why the hell would you encourage someone to order a mojito?

Gimmick.

jimi April 17, 2012 at 12:34 pm

*roll

JWatts April 17, 2012 at 5:54 pm

“Gimmick.”

You realize this is a bar right?

Ted Craig April 17, 2012 at 12:57 pm

2. Not going to win.

Rich Berger April 17, 2012 at 1:34 pm

3. I am absolutely shocked. BTW – over at Econtalk Russ Roberts has an interview with Richard Burkhauser who has a few criticisms of P&S.

Pat April 17, 2012 at 1:50 pm

Ignoring government redistribution and non-wage income makes income inequality look worse. So what do we do to combat it? Raise taxes (thus shifting more income away from wages) and redistribute more. Then when we do the same dumb incomplete measurment again, income inequality looks even worse than before trying to combat it.

Greeneyeshade April 17, 2012 at 1:59 pm

Re; Daniel Marcin

Oh goody. Another inexperienced ideologue, this one not brandishing not a Phd, but the pursuit of one, along with his righteous indignation as the principal qualifications to “protect the environment”, and direct other’s lives according to his sensibilities.

Sounds like a zealot guided primarily by watching to many episodes of “captain planet” as a kid and remaining in that state of maturity.

He needs to grow up before representing grownups.

FYI April 17, 2012 at 2:20 pm

It’s funny that the guy on #2 thinks he is somehow unique. I mean, next thing you know he will be teaching a class in Harvard about Obama.

Oh wait, someone else is already doing it…

http://www.newsmax.com/US/harvard-class-understanding-obama/2012/04/11/id/435591

dave smith April 17, 2012 at 3:25 pm

#2. There are so many sloppy statements on this guys blog, I wonder if he really is a PhD student in economics. First, credits do not have to be dollar for dollar matches. In fact, most are not. (The child care tax credit and the “older” education credits are examples.) Also, where railing about congress’ pay, he quotes nominal pay for congress then switches references the real pay of the typical person. Much else is stupid on his blog as well.

Greenyshade is right.

PK April 17, 2012 at 4:46 pm

#3 The French article only shows ineptitude of its authors signed below. With economists like these, France is the next Greece.

Kyle April 17, 2012 at 6:12 pm

The variable bar pricing scheme has been implented many times over the years. First time I myself came across the model was in a bar in Paris appropriately called ‘La Bourse’ in 2005. As an added bonus, instead of the typical Happy Hour concept, there would be a random ‘Market Crash’ late in the afternoon where all the drink’s price would fall off to their minimum price levels. Highly entertaining

The Original Frank April 17, 2012 at 9:01 pm

#3: So?

John April 17, 2012 at 10:33 pm

The inequality people have convinced me that there is inequality, but not that it is a bad thing. It seems like a natural byproduct of globalization: it is easier than ever to transmit the best ideas to the rest of the world. If you can make 1 dollar a billion times, that’s a lot of money (see: Facebook).

ila April 18, 2012 at 11:34 am

Re #2: “I’m also a trustee on the board of the Huron Valley Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO”

I stopped reading when I saw that an econ PhD. student _in Michigan_ is a trustee on the board of the AFL-CIO.

anon April 19, 2012 at 9:47 am

#2 PhD student running for congress or doing *anything* else = he’ll never finish the dissertation . . .

Walter Sobchak April 19, 2012 at 4:17 pm

Re: 3. Piketty and Saez. They have received a lot of favorable press, but I doubt that their work is universally approved by other economists. Can you point us toward any knowledgeable critiques of Piketty and Saez by economists?

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: