Assorted links

Comments

'Connectivistm is based on the concept that knowledge is not acquired but constructed and adjusted by the learner through connections that occur when the learner interacts with nodes in a network.'

Sounds like how propaganda works, actually. Especially that part about nodes in a network - when the filters are properly adjusted (certain links are not allowed here, as a concrete example of this in practice), the nodes reflect what the network is intended to provide.

And of course, it is entirely reasonable to assume the MRU network keeps track of a lot of information concerning the student - the metrics are part of what keeps the self-named university funded through the continuing efforts of the director of the Mercatus Center, after all.

What links are you talking about?

You may also find this link interesting

Why Has Regional Income Convergence in the U.S. Stopped?

Peter Ganong
Harvard University

Daniel Shoag
Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS)

July 30, 2012

HKS Working Paper No. RWP12-028

Abstract:
The past thirty years have seen a dramatic decrease in the rate of income convergence across states and in population flows to wealthy places. We develop a model where migration drives convergence and its disappearance. The model predicts that increases in housing prices in rich areas generate (1) a divergence in the skill-specific returns to productive places, (2) a redirection of low-skilled migration, (3) diminished human capital convergence, and (4) continued convergence among places with unconstrained housing supply. Using a new panel measure of housing-supply regulations, we confirm these predictions and the role of housing in the end of convergence.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2081216

I'm wondering why #3 isn't categorized under "there is not great stagnation."

I'm guessing Tyler was too disgusted to see the humor in it. Also, "the culture that is the Commonwealth"

#3. Shouldn't that be donut stuffed crust coming to Pizza Hut Canada?

Nope, can't, Apple holds the patent.

#2 Roberts and Taylor -- love the teaching method. Can't say the same for the content.

Here's where Taylor goes in those videos:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-15/sorry-u-s-recoveries-really-aren-t-different.html
"Some of these authors, including Kevin Hassett, Glenn Hubbard and John Taylor -- who are advisers to the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney -- as well as Michael Bordo, who supports the candidate, have stressed that the U.S. is also “different” in that its recoveries from recessions associated with financial crises have been rapid and strong. Their interpretation is at least partly based on a 2012 study by Bordo and Joseph Haubrich, which examines the issue for the U.S. since 1880."

Translation: These authors, by saying the US doesn't have Rogoff-Reinhardt kinds of recessions, conclude the US didn't need unique medicine to come out of the current recession. Meaning trying different medicine must have been bad medicine and that's the cause of the prolonged recession we have experienced.

R-R argue recovery from the current recession has been brisk compared to like recessions. Why? They are not quite willing to say it's because we chose the right medicine. They are willing to say it was right to adaptation of policy to the environment: "This doesn’t mean that policy is irrelevant, of course. On the contrary, at the depth of the recent financial crisis, there was almost certainly a risk of a second Great Depression. However, although it is clear that the challenges in recovering from financial crises are daunting, an early recognition of the likely depth and duration of the problem would certainly have been helpful, particularly in assessing various responses and their attendant risks. Policy choices also matter going forward."

I guess this is one of the fights whose winners will be decided on one's personal economic/political thinking. The only way that one will be able to absolutely declare a winner is to wait for history to play out (of course this is pretty much what happens anyway unless someone bold steps in...and of course we are seeing how well austerity works in many of the EU countries). Though I'm an Obama supporter part of me wishes that McCain would have won back in 2008 and we would have quickly learned how austerity would also have failed in this country. Personally I think all of this sniping back and forth continues to prove that the field of economics is largely a pseudo-science in terms of it being able to solve current problems. Too bad really.

" the field of economics is largely a pseudo-science in terms of it being able to solve current problems."

Right, because "real" sciences never take any time to actually get to the bottom of things. Moreover, when's the last time someone starved because we got something wrong in the standard model of physics?

It's very difficult to get things wrong in physics and chemistry because the underlying science is well known, can be proven, and is accepted by all in the field. That's more than can be said by economics when some are still touting Fama's Efficient Market Hypothesis which has not underlying truth.

@3 Can't help but provide a link to this from the early days of Canadian pizza:

http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/141406/detail/

Sach is confusing rate of growth with levels.

As Tyler said: "keep in mind that Bolivia still has higher per capita income than does Vietnam."

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/09/the-polity-that-is-vietnam.html

4. There's style-based cool and performance-based cool. Style-based cool is permanent (Saturn Rockets, Indian Motorcycles, 60s Corvettes, 80s US. v. USSR bubble hockey games, Flying V guitars), and the fact that they remain cool decades later says nothing negative about progress in the intervening decades. Performance-based cool (Roku boxes, DVRs, present-day smartphones) is fleeting. Some things are both kinds of cool (Saturn Rockets), but that's rare, and generally temporary.

I would think the Strat is a much better example than the Flying V, which to me screams cheesy dated 80s metal.

Otherwise 100% agree.

"Hot Dog Stuffed Crust Pizza" sounds revolting! The Italian should get a cease and desist order to make stop using the work Pizza to describe such things.

You mean like this?


When Wolfgang Puck introduced a line of frozen pizzas recently, he came up against USDA's restrictions. According to Quick, Puck wanted to market his sausage and herb pizzas with pesto sauce but couldn't, because they didn't have tomato sauce.


How did Puck get around the regulation? There's no requirement for what tomato sauce must contain to be called tomato sauce, so Puck put tomatoes in his pesto. The result: ''Pesto-Tomato Sauce'' and a USDA-approved label.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1988-05-19/lifestyle/0040160137_1_pizza-problem-cheese-pizzas-food-regulations/2

But as you can see, that was in the late 80's -- I'm sure the regulatory burden has lightened considerably since then...

So his tomato sauce actually has vegetables in it

I have a question to the economists on the board. Taylor talks about the savings rate being low and thus not a good explanation for the slow recovery. My question is this - is debt paydown by households somehow taken into account when calculating the savings rate?

Personal saving rate is the average percent of disposable income that households spend on goods and services. Saving is a flow concept, while savings (or net worth...wealth less debt) is a stock concept. Debt (or wealth) de/accumulation affect the saving rate indirectly via the effect on spending. If you want to (or need to) reduce your debt, then you use more of your income to pay off debt and less to consume so your saving rate rises. Alternately, if your are willing (and more able) to take on debt then your spending may rise faster than you income and your saving rate falls. Note, that the aggregate saving rate masks the differences in saving behavior across households.

Correction: Personal saving rate is the average percent of disposable income that households DO NOT spend on goods and services, SR = (Y - C)/Y

Can't answer your question (my guess is yes) but I would be interested to see the savings rate before the recession. My impression is we had a negative savings rate for much of the 2000s. So while the savings rate shown in the video may be low it may also be significantly higher than the times before. That obviously would impact the recovery negatively.

Here's the savings rate over time:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&id=PSAVERT&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=1969-01-01&coed=2012-08-01&line_color=%230000ff&link_values=false&line_style=Solid&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&lw=1&ost=-99999&oet=99999&mma=0&fml=a&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin&transformation=lin&vintage_date=2012-10-02&revision_date=2012-10-02

Wow that url is longer than I expected. Hopefully it works. If you look at it you can see that Taylor's saving hypothesis is pretty much pure bullshit. As expected while savings rates are lower than they were back in the 80's they are higher than they were before the recession. Conversely after the 80's recession savings rates decreased. But hey Taylor wants to help his team win so what's the big deal about ethics right?

And, under the hybrid headings of Assorted Links and Tylers in Everything, see the master himself in the TLS for October 19, reviewing Money in a Free Society: Keynes, Friedman, and the New Crisis in Capitalism by Tim Congdon*. Editor Peter Stothard's teaser is here (a version of which without - speaking of teasers - Naomi Wolf's** ... snap ... is here).

*Economists, always practice safe tax and wear a Congdon. I hope to post Tyler's review here when it and the rest of the issue posts to the online Subscriber Archive on Friday.

**Albums We'd Like To See Dept.: Naomi Klein: A Naked Musik by The Naomi Wolf Gang. And speaking of The Two Naomis, I see that commenters and bloggers alike over at ... Naked Capitalism ... have fallen prey to their ... n(a)ominative (!) homonymy - speaking of which, in seeing that a famed pseudonymous blogger therein - a Mr. Durden to see you, Sir - shares his first name with Professor Cowen, I suspect that those tracking the latest indices of writers' names so confused will now see Naomi to peak anew - and Tyler, too.

About the review of MRU: "What are the motives of these two accomplished economics professors? After reading more about each, and exploring their blog, Marginal Revolution, the drivers don’t appear to be monetary but stem from a passion for education, economics and sharing". True. But Tyler in one of his books sympathetically quotes Samuel Johnson as stating " No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money. " Apparently if "wrote" is replaced by " taught economics" Tyler would disapprove. If one can teach economics for the love of it why is it not possible to write for love too

1. As a speaker of the 56 alphabet Telugu , a language from South India , not clear what criteria were used to judge in the Alphabet Olympics , but flattered never the less. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telugu_language

I enjoyed the Roberts & Taylor videos. Why, though, does Taylor ignore inflation? He fails to observe that in every episode of a rapid return to potential, there was a period of catch-up inflation. Does he think this is a coincidence, and if not, does he think the Fed is incapable of stoking inflation more than it presently is?

How can Mr. cown claim that we've hit diminishing marginal returns to R&D when it seems we are only in the infancy of so many fields:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/10/22/121022fa_fact_specter

Because it's true? He's not speculating, the returns are down.

Sachs review only seems to me he misunderstood the book or didnt read it in the first place.

Comments for this post are closed