Entries Tagged 'Uncategorized' ↓

Today, on the radio, they explained that the stockmarket was down on increasing worry about the economy and the decision to utilise the oil reserves. If the stock market had gone up, I’m sure they’d have said it was increasing confidence about the economy and the decision to utilise the oil reserves.

I imagine that in ancient Greece, had there been news programmes, they would have said things like “and today, the oracle cut open a chicken and it bled to the North because of the decision to use the strategic olive oil reserves.”

Today, on the radio, they explained that the stockmarket was down on increasing worry about the economy and the decision to utilise the oil reserves. If the stock market had gone up, I'm sure they'd have said it was increasing confidence about the economy and the decision to utilise the oil reserves. I imagine that ...

I make two predictions on the effect of the Obama presidency on low income earners in the US:

1. The health insurance coverage rates will be much larger, close to 100%, especially if Obama gets two terms.
2. Low income earners will have more trouble accessing health care. This will be especially true for the lowest income earners.

I think these are both compatible and, in fact, will come true. Obama will trumpet the first achievement, the second will be reported sometimes as a mistery with headlines reading “in spite of new law, poor worse off.”

I remember an economist on NPR commenting on the effects of the Massachussetts mandate: the law achieved its most important objective: almost everyone now carries a plastic rectangle with the words “health insurance.” ObamaCare, by relying so much on Medicaid to address the access problem for low income populations, will be similar. More and more people will carry a card with the word “Medicaid” written on it. Unfortunately, this is being done at the same time as Medicaid budgets are being cut. The per-beneficiary budget will go down. This can only mean one thing: people on Medicaid will not get many health care services.

The biggest losers are, of course, the people who were already elligible for Medicaid before Obama, the lowest income groups. They are now worse off. The people who were previously outside the system and now inside it might be slightly better off (after all, they will get some service). This is redistribution from the bottom to the near bottom of the income pile.

I make two predictions on the effect of the Obama presidency on low income earners in the US: 1. The health insurance coverage rates will be much larger, close to 100%, especially if Obama gets two terms. 2. Low income earners will have more trouble accessing health care. This will be especially true for the lowest ...

I often add papers to the collection that I plan to use for a specific document (currently, my dissertation), but then feel a need to check whether I have actually used them. As it turns out, the bibtool can do the opposite of what I want: it retrieves the references that were cited. However, we can just use diff to get at the ones that were not cited.

Here is a little shell script using bibtool for a bibtex database called references.bib and a latex file main.tex:

bibtool references.bib > all.bib
bibtool -x main.aux >cited.bib
diff -u all.bib cited.bib |grep '^-' |sed 's,.,,' > notcited.bib
rm all.bib cited.bib

We need to run the first bibtool command in order to normalise the references. Otherwise, the diff will pick up formatting differences.

I often add papers to the collection that I plan to use for a specific document (currently, my dissertation), but then feel a need to check whether I have actually used them. As it turns out, the bibtool can do the opposite of what I want: it retrieves the references that were cited. However, ...

The recent brouaha about whether rap is poetry or not is especially interesting for me.

More than once, my wife and I, have stood in the car, waiting for some reading of poetry on NPR to finish. Some prize-winning poet. We quote the poems for days. It often is just so unbelievably bad that we stand bemusedly aghast.

Compared to most prize-winning modern American poetry, the average rapper can write some pretty good rhymes.

The recent brouaha about whether rap is poetry or not is especially interesting for me. More than once, my wife and I, have stood in the car, waiting for some reading of poetry on NPR to finish. Some prize-winning poet. We quote the poems for days. It often is just so unbelievably bad that we ...

I expect that both Portugal and Ireland have had, for some years, some ultra-secret study groups on plans to leave the Euro. Especially for Portugal, that would be the best option, for reasons that Tyler Cowen makes clear.

It is a thorny problem, but it could be done.

I expect that both Portugal and Ireland have had, for some years, some ultra-secret study groups on plans to leave the Euro. Especially for Portugal, that would be the best option, for reasons that Tyler Cowen makes clear. It is a thorny problem, but it could be done.

1. The parable of the frog who dies in boiling water when the temperature is raised slowly* is often invoked when the discussion turns to such themes as the debt problem or global warming.

2. It is, however, the fallacy of the we, where the argument made as if there was a we which makes the decision: if we don’t do something about global warming…. As Russ Roberts would point out, though, there is no we which decides. There is no frog, there are many many different screaming entities in the pot. Some say it’s getting too hot, others say, no it’s fine, just stay a bit longer. It’s not that we don’t notice; rather there is a bunch of screaming about the water temperature from all sides.

3. Another parable is that of the Thanksgiving turkey. In the months before November, the turkey is not sure of whether its human masters are benign or evil. There are rumours of an upcoming slaughter. However, each day that passes only soothes the turkey. The “humans are nice” party has the best arguments: humans come and give food. The “humans want to kill us” party is a bunch of pessimistic killjoys, who are proven wrong everytime. That is, until they aren’t and all the turkeys are, in fact, killed.

4. Government spending has been a part of the public discourse in Portugal for the past 15 years or so. For years, the party of “markets are nice and will always lend us money” (normally phrased as “we can always roll over the debt”) and “there is life beyond worrying about the deficit” were, apparently, proven right (the government could spend and just borrow more). Mostly they were elected too. After all, why curtail spending when you can do it with impunity? The fiscal conservatives were heartless kill-joys (like the global warming alarmists are granola bar munching kill-joys).

6. Then, in less than a year, the “we cannot cut spending in this economy” party wasn’t right anymore. The problem was real (the truth became that we cannot borrow in this economy). Oh, and it was also too late to do something about it. That’s how the country ended up needing a bailout to pay the basic bills (nobody has any idea yet of what will happen in the longer term). It didn’t happen in a fit of absent mindness; nobody was caught unawares. People thought about it, heard the arguments, and elected those that made the wrong choices.

7. As I tweeted before, deficit spending is like driving drunk: most of the time nothing happens and it might even be fun, but do not be fooled into thinking it’s safe.

* Yes , it is not true. As it is not true that a turtle ever raced a hare. Can we just agree that it is a useful parable.

1. The parable of the frog who dies in boiling water when the temperature is raised slowly* is often invoked when the discussion turns to such themes as the debt problem or global warming. 2. It is, however, the fallacy of the we, where the argument made as if there was a we which makes ...

Consider the following thought experiment: Congress passes a law saying that all the living Nobel Prize winners in Economics are to gather. Whatever they decide by unanimous vote will automatically become law. Basically, everyone who has won a Nobel Prize gets a veto.
(You can run the same experiment with only the American Nobelists, if you prefer).

What sort of laws would come out of this committee? I’d wager they’d look more like soft libertarianism than anything else. Here are some of the ideas that I think would win:

1. Curbs on occupational licensing.
2. Reducing (maybe ending) the tax subsidy for employer-based health insurance.
3. End a bunch of subsidies for special interests (e.g., agriculture).
4. More unilateral free-trade.
5. Some form of school vouchers.

Here are a few maybes:

1. A carbon tax
2. Simplified tax code
3. Lower corporate tax rates

Here are some of the ideas where there would be no consensus:

1. Which taxes to raise or lower
2. Anything about about health care (except on the employer tax benefit)
3. Anything about higher education.

*

Here is the most interesting part of the exercise: where there is no consensus in economics about what the government ought to do is exactly where the government is most likely to act; where there is consensus, the government is most likely to do nothing.

Consider the following thought experiment: Congress passes a law saying that all the living Nobel Prize winners in Economics are to gather. Whatever they decide by unanimous vote will automatically become law. Basically, everyone who has won a Nobel Prize gets a veto. (You can run the same experiment with only the American Nobelists, if ...

It’s the Republicans. At least, if you look at who votes for them.

Note that this does not extend to conservatives being more pro-science. It’s the non-conservative Republicans who are pulling the Republican scores up.

It's the Republicans. At least, if you look at who votes for them. Note that this does not extend to conservatives being more pro-science. It's the non-conservative Republicans who are pulling the Republican scores up.

One sentence from D. McIntyre struck me: Detroit presents America with that rare problem which has no solutions.

I don’t know if it is American optimism or unbridled leftism that better characterises that sentence, but I don’t think that problems for which no solution exists are at all rare. In public policy, they are rather the norm: every solution has its own problems and you cannot do better than trading off one issue against the other.

One sentence from D. McIntyre struck me: Detroit presents America with that rare problem which has no solutions. I don't know if it is American optimism or unbridled leftism that better characterises that sentence, but I don't think that problems for which no solution exists are at all rare. In public policy, they are rather ...

When it comes to whether to buy organic produce or the regular kind, I’ve come upon a pretty good heuristic: buy organic only when the price difference is big. Otherwise, I just get the regular.

The reasoning is the following: I’m looking for a better tasting, more aromatic, product; not one grown according to the technology that existed before 1913. Often, the more premium products tend to be organic, but cheap, supermarket organic, is just as flavourless as the regular kind; so I might as well save a few cents.

Also, I’m briging the organic movement back to its original roots: to look down at people who don’t want to pay 4$/lb for tomatos.

When it comes to whether to buy organic produce or the regular kind, I've come upon a pretty good heuristic: buy organic only when the price difference is big. Otherwise, I just get the regular. The reasoning is the following: I'm looking for a better tasting, more aromatic, product; not one grown according to the ...