Category: Economics

Those who graduate from college late in life

by  Tyler Cowen in

It is generally agreed upon that most individuals who acquire a college degree do so in their early 20s. Despite this consensus, we show that in the US from the 1930 birth cohort onwards a large fraction – around 20% – of college graduates obtained their degree after age 30. We explore the implications of this phenomenon. First, we show that these so-called late bloomers have significantly contributed to the narrowing of gender and racial gaps in the college share, despite the general widening of the racial gap. Second, late bloomers are responsible for more than half of the increase in the aggregate college share from 1960 onwards. Finally, we show that the returns to having a college degree vary depending on the age at graduation. Ignoring the existence of late bloomers therefore leads to a significant underestimation of the returns to college education for those finishing college in their early 20s.

That is from a new NBER paper by Zsófia L. Bárány, Moshe Buchinsky, and Pauline Corblet.

The Indian Challenge to Blockchains: Digital Public Goods

by  Alex Tabarrok in

In my post, Blockchains and the Opportunity of the Commons, I explored the potential of blockchains to create new commons:

Blockchains and tokenization are a way to incentivize the creation of a commons. A commons is an unowned place, platform, or protocol that helps people to meet, communicate and transact. Commons underlying modern life include TCP/IP, SMTP, HTTP, GPS and the English language. We don’t see these commons clearly because they are free, ubiquitous and, like air, taken for granted. What we do see are platforms like Airbnb, Uber and the NYSE and places to meet and communicate like OkCupid, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. What blockchain and tokenization offer is the possibility of creating commons to replace all of these services and much more.

For the most part, the potential has not been realized. But the core idea of substituting a protocol for a firm has been taken in a different direction in India. Instead of blockchains, India has been experimenting with digital public goods. A digital public good is open source software with open data and open standards–available for use or even modification and adaption by anyone. The blockchain community, for example, has long aspired to develop a blockchain-based Uber, connecting drivers and riders without a corporate intermediary. India has achieved this through digital public goods instead.

Namma Yatri is an open-source, open-data Uber-like protocol with 100% of the commission flowing directly from rider to driver. Namma Yatri is built on the Beckn Protocol, a product of the Beckn Foundation which is backed by Infosys co-founder Nandan Nilekani (Tyler and I had the opportunity to talk with many people behind the project including Nandan on a recent trip to India). Namma Yatri has booked over 15 million trips in just one year of operation, mostly in one city, Bangalore. I expect it will expand rapidly.

Namma Yatri is only one example of a digital public good in the India Stack, a collection that includes identity (Aadhaar), payments (UPI) and digital data sharing (e.g. digital lockers). Since its launch in 2008, for example, India’s Aadhaar system has created a digital identity for over 1.2 billion people allowing them to open some 650 million bank accounts. This has enhanced financial inclusion and facilitated direct government payments of pensions and rations, reducing corruption. Likewise, the UPI system built modern payment rails which are then leveraged by banks and firms such as Google Pay and WhatsApp. The resulting payments system does some 10 billion transactions a month and is one of the fastest and lowest cost in the world.

Challenges remain. The development of digital public goods relies on funding from non-profits, governments, and private consortiums, raising questions about long-term sustainability. These goods need regular maintenance and updates, and some require backend support. Namma Yatri began as a completely free app for drivers and users but if there is a problem who do you call? To support the back-end office, and to pay for updated inputs (such as maps) the service has started to use a subscription fee. Nothing wrong with that but it’s a reminder that firms are not so easily dispensed with. Privacy is another concern. While blockchains offer privacy at the technology layer, privacy for digital public goods depend on legal and normative frameworks. For instance, India’s Aadhaar system is legally restricted from police use, a smart balance that needs to be maintained in changing times.

Despite these challenges, there is no denying that India has built digital public goods at scale in a way that demonstrates an alternative pathway for digital infrastructure and a challenge to blockchains.

Labor market evidence from ChatGPT

by  Tyler Cowen in

So far some of the main effects are quite egalitarian:

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) holds the potential to either complement knowledge workers by increasing their productivity or substitute them entirely. We examine the short-term effects of the recent release of the large language model (LLM), ChatGPT, on the employment outcomes of freelancers on a large online platform. We find that freelancers in highly affected occupations suffer from the introduction of generative AI, experiencing reductions in both employment and earnings. We find similar effects studying the release of other image-based, generative AI models. Exploring the heterogeneity by freelancers’ employment history, we do not find evidence that high-quality service, measured by their past performance and employment, moderates the adverse effects on employment. In fact, we find suggestive evidence that top freelancers are disproportionately affected by AI. These results suggest that in the short term generative AI reduces overall demand for knowledge workers of all types, and may have the potential to narrow gaps among workers.

That is from a new paper by Xiang Hui, Oren Reshef, and Luofeng Zhou, via Fernand Pajot.  And here is an FT summary of some key results.

I would stress this point, however.  As more ordinary life and commerce structures itself around AI, more and more AI-driven or AI-enable projects will become possible.  That will favor those who are good at conceiving of projects and executing them, and those longer-run effects may well be less egalitarian.

What do we know about non-profit boards?

by  Tyler Cowen in

In fact, however, a reasonable consensus of experts on NPOs [non-profit organizations] agrees that their governance is generally abysmal, worse than that of for-profit corporations.  NPO directors are mostly ill-informed, quarrelsome, clueless about their proper role, and dominated by the CEO — as proponents of shareholder primacy would predict.

Here is the full paper by George W. Dent, Jr.  Here is the more general literature.

The cross-sectional implications of the social discount rate

by  Tyler Cowen in

Maya Eden has a new paper on this topic, I believe it is forthcoming in Econometrica:

In this paper, I consider two normative questions: (1) how should policymakers approach tradeoffs that involve different age groups, and (2) at what rate should policymakers discount the consumption of future generations? I demonstrate that, under standard assumptions, these two questions are equivalent: caring more about the future means caring less about the elderly. Even small differences between the social discount rate and the market interest rate can have significant quantitative implications for the relative value placed on the consumption of different age groups.

To get to the paper, look here and then click on the first link.  Some of you will recall that I make a similar argument in my Stubborn Attachments.

Elsewhere on the discount rate front, the OMB is calling for lower discount rates in policy analysis.  I’m all for that, but the trick is to apply them consistently, not just use them to rationalize particular government expenditures.  Will we at the same time start spending less money on the elderly and more money on the young?  Otherwise obsess over growth-enhancing policies?  To ask such questions is to answer.  If only our institutions took their own work seriously on discount rates…

Ken Opalo is more optimistic about Africa (from my email)

by  Tyler Cowen in

Just a quick note that the story isn’t a straightforward “lost decade.”

Human development indicators (health, education, housing) are up. Lots of infrastructure is being built all over the place. The real challenges behind the growth slowdown are:

1) productivity increases have stalled since about 2014 (and was higher than India’s for a while
2) delayed fertility transition continues to depress the per capita income measure.

More on this here: https://kenopalo.substack.com/p/there-is-an-urgent-need-to-unlock

Best,

Ken

America’s top one percent has not been seeing a rising income share

by  Tyler Cowen in

That is the topic of my latest Bloomberg column.  The opener is this:

Can a single self-published paper really refute decades of work by three famous economists? If the paper is the modestly titled “Income Inequality in the United States: Using Tax Data to Measure Long-Term Trends,” then the answer — with qualifications — is yes.

And this:

Now, in their latest study, they arrive at a conclusion that will be startling to a lot of people: “Increasing government transfers and tax progressivity have resulted in rising real incomes for all income groups and little change in after-tax top income shares.”

More concretely, looking at pre-tax income, the share of the top 1% has gone up only 2.6 percentage points since the early 1960s. For after-tax income, top income shares haven’t changed much at all.

Auten and Splinter have a methodological explanation for why their results differ. The share of true income missing in tax data has increased over time, and they attempt to adjust for that discrepancy, as well as for how income is sheltered in corporations has changed. Auten and Splinter also include cash and in-kind transfers for the lower income groups, to better measure their true incomes.

Recommended.

A Tax Puzzle

by  Alex Tabarrok in

Analyze the following four images. For each image, guess what is being taxed. Use only the information in the image.

FYI ChatGPT was not able to solve this question directly, although it was very good at analyzing what was distinctive or odd about each image and thus suggesting some possible answers.

Hat tip: Lionel Page, via Shruti Rajagopalan, includes answers and some variants.

My Conversation with the excellent Jennifer Burns

by  Tyler Cowen in

Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is the episode description:

Jennifer Burns is a professor history at Stanford who works at the intersection of intellectual, political, and cultural history. She’s written two biographies Tyler highly recommends: her 2009 book, Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right and her latest, Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative, provides a nuanced look into the influential economist and public intellectual.

Tyler and Jennifer start by discussing how her new portrait of Friedman caused her to reassess him, his lasting impact in statistics, whether he was too dogmatic, his shift from academic to public intellectual, the problem with Two Lucky People, what Friedman’s courtship of Rose Friedman was like, how Milton’s family influenced him, why Friedman opposed Hayek’s courtesy appointment at the University of Chicago, Friedman’s attitudes toward friendship, his relationship to fiction and the arts, and the prospects for his intellectual legacy. Next, they discuss Jennifer’s previous work on Ayn Rand, including whether Rand was a good screenwriter, which is the best of her novels, what to make of the sex scenes in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, how Rand and Mises got along, and why there’s so few successful businesswomen depicted in American fiction. They also delve into why fiction seems so much more important for the American left than it is for the right, what’s driving the decline of the American conservative intellectual condition, what she will do next, and more.

Here is one excerpt:

COWEN: What’s the future of Milton Friedman, say, 30, 40 years from now? Where will the reputation be? University of Chicago is no longer Friedmanite, right? We know that. There are fewer outposts of Friedmanite-thinking than there had been. Will he be underrated or somehow reinvented or what?

BURNS: Let me look into my crystal ball. I don’t think the name will have faded. I think there are still names that people read. People still read Keynes and Mill and figures like that to see what did they say in their day that was so influential. I think that Friedman has got into the water and into the air a bit. I do some work on tracing out his influence.

Within economics, no one’s going to say, “Oh, I’m a Friedmanite,” or fewer people are, but this is someone whose major work was done half a century or more ago, so I don’t think that’s surprising. It would be surprising if economics had been at a standstill as Friedman still called the tune. When you think about the way we accord importance to the modern Federal Reserve, of course, there were things that happened in the world, but Friedman’s ideas did so much to shape that understanding.

He’s still in policymakers’ minds. He’s still in the monetary policy establishment’s minds, even if they’re not fully following him. I think we’re in the middle of a big reckoning now. You saw all the debate about M2 and the pandemic and monetary spending. I don’t know where it’s all going to settle out. It’s a more complicated world than the one that Friedman looked at. I tend to think he is an essential thinker, that the basics of what he talked about are going to be known 50 years from now, for sure.

COWEN: Did Milton Friedman have friends?

Definitely recommended, and Jennifer’s new book Milton Friedman: The Last Conservative is one of my favorite books of the year.  It will likely stand as the definitive biography of Friedman.

The Amazing Vernon Smith

by  Alex Tabarrok in

You can find Vernon Smith hard at work at his computer by 7:30 each morning, cranking out 10 solid hours of writing and researching every day.

His job is incredibly demanding — he is currently on the faculty of both the business and law schools at Chapman University. But the hard work pays off: Smith’s research is consistently ranked as the most-cited work produced at the school — a testament to his ongoing academic influence and success. He manages his job and research work while also coauthoring books and traveling around the country to deliver lectures.

It’s a remarkable level of productivity, made all the more remarkable by one simple fact: Vernon Smith is 96 years old.

Smith, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences at the tender age of 75, says he feels the same passion as he did then, and even as he did when he embarked on his career more than seven decades ago.

That’s from the AARP on SuperAgers. In addition to all that, Vernon “is one of 1,600 participants in the University of California, Irvine’s 90+ Study, a research project examining both successful aging and dementia in people age 90 and older.”

Vernon was always one of our sharpest and most productive colleagues. He remains an inspiration.

Pharmaceutical Price Controls and the Marshmallow Test

by  Alex Tabarrok in

The pharmaceutical market is in turmoil. On the one hand we have what looks like a golden age of medicine with millions of lives saved by COVID vaccines, a leap in mRNA technology, excellent new obesity and blood sugar drugs, breakthroughs in cancer treatments and more. On the other hand, the Inflation Reduction Act includes the most extensive price controls on pharmaceuticals we have ever seen in the United States.

In Washington-speak the “Inflation Reduction Act” requires HHS to “negotiate” drug prices for Medicare Part D and Part B to establish a maximum “fair” price. In reality there is no negotiation–firms who refuse to negotiate are hit with huge taxes. The “negotiation,” if you want to call it that, is “your money or your life” and fairness has little to do with it. The IRA also requires very costly inflation rebates, i.e. a price control/tax. In essence, the IRA is a taking; for drugs with a large Medicare market it is similar to abrogating patents to 9 years for small molecule drugs and 13 years for biologics. For the included drugs there will be a significant reduction in revenues. Moreover, we don’t yet know whether the plan will be extended to more and more drugs. There is significant uncertainty affecting the entire market. What will be situation in 10 years? Will the US be like Europe?

Our government is failing the marshmallow test, big time.

Reduced revenues mean less R&D. The value of extending life is very high and so in my view medical R&D is underprovided. Thus, price controls are taking us in the wrong direction.

The positive effects of price controls are immediate and easy to see: Prices are reduced.

The negative effects of price controls take time and are harder to see. Namely:

  • Fewer drugs for Medicare market.
  • Less research on post-approval indications and confirmatory trials.
  • Reduced incentive for generics to enter quickly.
  • Most importantly: Less R&D spending leading to fewer new drugs, a reduced pharmaceutical armory, lower life expectancy and higher morbidity. By one calculation, ~135 fewer new drugs through to 2039 (see also here and here and here and here).
  • Fewer new drugs means more spending on physicians and hospitals so in the long run price controls may not even save money! (Most prescriptions are for generics. Drugs fall greatly in price when they go generic but physicians and hospitals never go generic!)

Price controls are a classic example of political myopia. Price controls, like rent controls and deficit financing, have modest benefits now and big future costs and thus they are supported by politicians who want to be elected now. Unfortunately, current citizens don’t forecast the future well and future citizens don’t have a vote so it’s easy to create big future costs without engaging an opposition.

The emergence of groundbreaking pharmaceuticals and the increasing implementation of price controls are probably related trends. Everyone wants the great new pharmaceuticals without paying for them. We need to think more long-term–we have much more to gain from a continuing flow of new pharmaceuticals than from lower prices on the last generation. Don’t forget that children who fail the marshmallow test do less well later in life. Well, our government is failing the marshmallow test, big time.

Pharmaceutical price controls driven by myopia and the failure to delay gratification are greatly harming future patients.

Zoning Deregulation Increases Affordable Housing

by  Alex Tabarrok in

Geetika Nagpal and Sahil Gandhi study zoning deregulation in Mumbai, India. As I pointed out in my video, Skyscrapers and Slums: What’s Driving Mumbai’s Housing Crisis?, Mumbai has very restrictive floor area ratio regulations (also called Floor Space Index, FSI, regulations, see the video for an explanation) which means taller buildings require more unused land. In 2018, however, FAR was liberalized for some streets:

Mumbai’s stringent FAR limits, which are much lower than those of comparable megacities, are often criticized for causing housing unaffordability (Bertaud, 2004). Despite the criticism, establishing a causal effect has been challenging because of a lack of changes in FAR regulations. The relaxation in 2018 linked a parcel’s FAR to the width of its bordering road, providing incremental FAR relaxation for parcels on roads wider than 12 meters. Parcels on narrower roads remained ineligible for the relaxation. Our reduced-form specification uses a DID design to compare developments built between 2014 and 2022 on wider roads with FAR relaxation with those on narrower roads that remained ineligible.

…The FAR relaxation results in a significant supply response, driven by less expensive, smaller housing units. Developers fully utilize the FAR relaxation, increasing the average
number of apartments in each treated multifamily development by 28% relative to the control.

…We develop a structural model of housing supply and demand that incorporates the provision of amenity floorspace and shows that average home buyer incomes are 3.18% lower post-relaxation.

GO YIMBY!

Geetika Nagpal is on the market from Brown.

Low Income Drivers Gain from Congestion Pricing

by  Alex Tabarrok in

Cody Cook and Pearl Li write:

….there is disagreement about the distributional effects of highway toll lanes. On one side, policymakers refer to dynamic tolling as “value pricing” and emphasize that it provides choice to drivers (Samdahl et al., 2013). On the other side, opponents are concerned that “Lexus lanes” enrich the wealthy at everyone else’s expense (Astor, 2017; Rosendorf, 2018). Evaluation of these perspectives depends on two empirical objects: the distribution of driver preferences and what we call the “road technology”—the relationship between traffic quantities and travel times. When one lane becomes tolled, drivers substitute from the newly priced lane into the remaining unpriced ones, increasing travel times in the unpriced lanes. High peak-hour prices may also induce drivers to substitute toward driving off-peak (or not at all), which can increase average speeds when the road technology is convex. Finally, since tolling changes the predictability of travel times, having the option to take the priced lanes can serve as insurance against worse-than-expected traffic conditions.

In this paper, we study the aggregate and distributional impacts of dynamic tolling. To do this, we bring together data on toll transactions, historical traffic conditions, and driver characteristics from the I-405 Express Toll Lanes in Washington State. We begin by presenting two sets of descriptive facts: first, aggregate speed and throughput increased after the introduction of tolling on this highway, and second, low-income drivers face advantageous trade-offs between price and travel time savings in the toll lanes. Next, to quantify the equilibrium effects of tolling, we build and estimate a model of driver demand, the road technology, and the pricing algorithm. In particular, the demand model incorporates the features of dynamic tolling highlighted above: choices of where and when to drive, as well as uncertainty about prices and travel times. Using the estimated model, we find that low-income drivers in fact gain the most from status-quo tolling, and we explore how equilibrium outcomes would change under counterfactual pricing policies.

Pearl Li from Stanford is on the job market.