Attention Economy


Friday, July 27, 2012

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Government and Effective Economic Policy


Harvard Economist Ed Glaeser Makes a Key Point Regarding Effective Governments:

“Every big government makes mistakes -- generous public pensions that start at young ages, subsidies that pay farmers to leave fields fallow, unlimited health-care promises. Effective governments are able to abandon mistaken policies that imperil society, even against the powerful opposition of the favored few who benefit from the programs.
Sweden may be the most obvious example of a social democracy that went too far and reshaped itself. In the early 1970s, Sweden was an economic rock star, but its overregulated, overtaxed economy lost ground in the 1970s and 1980s and experienced a crisis from 1990 to 1993. The country responded with significant reforms, deregulating, privatizing pensions and moving from vast deficits to budget surpluses. The reforms weren’t easy -- previously favored companies and workers lost out -- but the good of the country triumphed over the good of particular interest groups.”
---



Meanwhile, Stanford Economist Michael Boskin Considers the Impact of Bad Governance on California:

Friday, July 20, 2012

Paean to Traditional Education


Mark Edmundson’s excellent op-ed from the NYTIMES. A true insight from the op-ed:
“Every memorable class is a bit like a jazz composition. There is the basic melody that you work with. It is defined by the syllabus. But there is also a considerable measure of improvisation against that disciplining background.”

State-Level Income Convergence & Housing Prices

Fascinating study from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on the link between inequality, state-level income convergence and housing prices.


Interesting Graphics

Related article:

Thursday, July 19, 2012

Estonians Expose Krugman's Ignorance


The most important economics related story of 2012 (only a slight exaggeration) – Krugmenistan vs. Estonia (BusinessWeek article):


-----
My Comments on the article:
It is wonderful to see excellent, well-argued ripostes being made by little known economists from a country (Estonia) that few Americans have heard about.
Far too often, it is assumed that nearly all the important progress in the field of Economics originates in the US and that the rest of the world has little to contribute. The recent crisis has taught us of the dangers arising from groupthink (in academia and on Wall Street). For instance, many pay undue attention to the policy related ramblings of Paul Krugman, despite the fact that he is NOT a career macroeconomist (he is an (Nobel Prize winning) international trade economist). Krugman, utilizing the wide reach of the NYTIMES, often makes highly simplistic and narrow-minded arguments regarding critical macro issues which negatively affect real world policy debate.



The article, Krugmenistan vs. Estonia, is probably best feature story BusinessWeek has done in ages.


First key point from the article –

The article notes:
“In his blog post, Krugman started his graph—and his logic—when Estonia’s GDP had reached its peak, in 2007. Wages were high, and unemployment was low. Good for most citizens, and for most citizens now things are still worse than they were then. But if you move Krugman’s graph all the way back to 2000, you see slow, steady growth in GDP, then a short boom, then a hard crash, and now growth leveling back off to where it would have been without the boom. In the boom years, says Varblane, “GDP growth was not real. It was artificial,” fueled by cheap debt from abroad. The peak, Krugman’s point of comparison, was not “real,” he says.”

Relevance to America: The US GDP for several years prior to the Great Recession was artificially inflated by real estate and equity market bubbles and debt fueled consumption. To repeatedly call for massive fiscal and monetary stimulus to get back to 2007 levels of unemployment rate as quickly as possible seems utterly misguided. Years of structural changes are needed to get the American economy on a new sustained growth path and just throwing more money won’t fix the problem (that was nearly three decades in the making).

The second key point from the article –

“Large countries have the luxury of a discretionary currency policy. Small countries have a credibility problem no matter what they do.”

Relevance: Decades ago, Ronald McKinnon (1963, “Optimal Currency Areas”, AER Vol 53 (1)), showed the limited significance of nominal exchange rate devaluations for small open economies attempting to restore competitiveness.

Sloth - International Comparison


The Laziest Countries in the World

Monetary Policy Dilemmas

TIPS – Negative Yield

QE – An Appraisal

Emerging Markets – Cloudy Skies Ahead