Read the quote of the previous week.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Read the quote of the previous week.
Friday, October 26, 2007
1. I cherish my consumer surplus. I value most of the stuff I buy way more than what I have to pay for them; vanilla ice cream makes me happy beyond belief, and the same is true for the music of Dream Theater and the (soon to be purchased) Apple iphone. And what am I asked to pay for them? Peanuts.
2. I cherish my producer surplus. I am getting paid way, way more than the salary that would make me indifferent between supplying labour and staying at home.
3. I never have regrets: I did the best I could given the information available to me at the time. Judging I could have done better using information I acquired at a later date makes as much sense as regretting the existence of gravity. On a related topic, I understand the irrelevance of sunk costs.
4. While I do care for my welfare in relative terms, my welfare in absolute terms looms large in my utility function - and, boy, look how its value has been growing.
5. The selfishness of my fellow human beings does not make me anxious or depressed. Adam Smith (or was it Mandeville?) taught me that humans, selfish as they are, can make happy societies. And perhaps more to the point, they can make me happy.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Sunday, October 21, 2007
- Preston McAfee brings a second noteworthy innovation to Economic Inquiry (I also blogged about the first one since he came as editor to that journal): "We now have a miscellany section. Miscellany operates like the JPE section of the same name, publishing humor and curiosities. Humor is purely a taste determination and being funny for an academic is like being tall for a dwarf. Submissions for the miscellany should indicate so on the manuscript. A good idea is to title the paper "Miscellany: The Simple Economics of Complexity." " The quote was from the the page on the policies of the Economic Inquiry. See more on this from the new editor of the Economic Inquiry humor section (with hints of how humorous that would be).
- Greg Mankiw with some super interesting links to new papers on our genetic sense of fairness (the papers he is talking about are published in the PNAS and respectively, Science).
- The Right vs. Left Brain test (via Tyler Cowen on MR). I have to confess that I only see the ballerina spin clockwise, no matter how hard I try to spot also the reverse spinning (apparently most people can only see the anti-clockwise spinning: that is very curious for me). Right hemisphere use and risk taking behaviour it is, then (the rest of the characteristics associated with one or the other type are pure speculation, I'd say).
- The economics of gold digging, via Steven Levitt. The most interesting part is Levitt's discussion of the initial female Craiglist post and the succesive male answer. In particular the following Levitt quote should be saved for future reference; it suggests there is still hope in this profession, despite the initial odds :-)
"I wouldn’t expect male economists to marry very well. Firstly, they tend to think like the guy who wrote this letter. Secondly, they tend to be nerds. Thirdly, they make very little money when they are young because they get so much education, even though their lifetime income is quite high. Yet I think it is fair to say that the economists I know have married stunningly well (myself included). We’ve all been puzzling over this fact for the fifteen years I have been in the profession. As of yet, no one has come up with a good explanation. I doubt it could be perfect foresight on the part of the women we marry."
Monday, October 15, 2007
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Let's see how good of a forecast this is; in any case I am 100% sure that I will be able to refer back to this prediction for any future year, sooner or later they'll get the Nobel :-).
Saturday, October 13, 2007
It looks like Elhanan Helpman & Gene Grossman have the best odds overall; indeed international trade seems to be a/the hype lately (and indeed Helpman and Grossman deserve the Nobel, sooner or later). Though my personal wish is that Dale Mortensen wins it this year (he will for sure win it in one the coming years, most likely joint with Peter Diamond and Chris Pissarides, for developing the search models; but why not just now?), especially since he just gave me excellent comments & critique at this (ex post very good!) "Labour Market Dynamics Growth" conference in Sandbjerg from where I returned yesterday-- and that despite the fact that I made a mess out of my presentation :-). Dale for Nobel!
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Thursday, October 04, 2007
- Vote (ex post I wouldn't bother...) for the free market hall of fame. Could have been done much better, the way they did this is a shame, really. And some of the results so far reinforce that...
- A September '07 profile of Robert Barro, yet another (potential) physicist turned (macro)economist :-).