When I was in kindergarten we played with blocks. The teacher would demonstrate: "Blue, green, yellow, blue, green, yellow, what comes next in the pattern?"
I would always yell "red." The teacher was not amused.
Much life can be described by patterns. The sun comes up every morning. The sun goes down every evening. Winter, Spring, Summer, Fall comes every year. Every evening I do homework.
But patterns break. The sun does not come up and go down at the same time each day. Harsh winters are followed by mild ones. I graduate from one school so I can suffer at another.
The problem with poverty and development economists are that they are looking for a pattern that does not exist. There are no magical elixirs. There are not mathematical models or surefire governmental policies that can get a country out of poverty.
Four years ago, I was working with my Dad. I hated it. I was working sixty to seventy hours a week so I could save pennies.
Tonight I am staring at a computer screen looking for diversions from homework and meaningless paper writing. Four years ago, no one could have convinced me that I would be sitting here tonight. No one could have "saved" me from this predicament. And I would not and still do not want "saving."
Development is a classic the chicken or the egg problem. Do you have to be rich to get rich? Does good governance and success precede wealth? Or does wealth precede good governance? I do not know, and no economist knows.
Unlike many of my Ivy League trained colleagues, I am willing to admit my ignorance. I do not know if this makes me better, but at least I am honest.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
What I Have Been Thinking
Daniel Klein writes what I have been thinking.
I meant to post on this last week, but I did not. As a professor tells me when I am late for the gym, "Get your priorities straight."
I better get my priorities straight (and not be posting at midnight) before I am forced to have different priorities.
I meant to post on this last week, but I did not. As a professor tells me when I am late for the gym, "Get your priorities straight."
I better get my priorities straight (and not be posting at midnight) before I am forced to have different priorities.
400th Post
Since this is the 400th post on Why?, I wanted to write something positive.
If I stay in academia, I would like to model my career after Russell Roberts. He consistently writes quality posts at Cafe Hayek. He wrote a wonderful book about free trade. He sounds passionate and down-to-earth on his podcasts. He was even a gentleman when Tyler Cowen sounded like John Kenneth Galbraith for a few minutes. He once replied to a thank you Email I sent him. He also likes sports. All in all, He seems to be a good man.
Like most people, he probably has some flaws once you get to know him. But I am going to remain positive (at least for this post).
If I stay in academia, I would like to model my career after Russell Roberts. He consistently writes quality posts at Cafe Hayek. He wrote a wonderful book about free trade. He sounds passionate and down-to-earth on his podcasts. He was even a gentleman when Tyler Cowen sounded like John Kenneth Galbraith for a few minutes. He once replied to a thank you Email I sent him. He also likes sports. All in all, He seems to be a good man.
Like most people, he probably has some flaws once you get to know him. But I am going to remain positive (at least for this post).
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Black And Brown
1. Black and brown do not match. My Dad always told me black goes with everything. He was wrong. It does not go with brown. When I was a child I thought like a child. Now I know black and brown do not match, but I still think like a child.
2. I do not work hard enough. I blame my laziness on boredom. But boredom is self-inflicted. I have to make my work more interesting or stop worrying about being lazy. I will probably stop worrying about being lazy.
3. I now officially have a Masters' degree and a diploma to prove it. I feel no different.
4. I have multiple accounts with Google, but I have never paid Google a dime. I like my relationship with Google. Some politician or wannabe politician will eventually go after Google for its monopolistic behavior, and good things rarely last. But I am happy now.
I also wonder if Google will eventually have to charge. Eventually cable television and pay-per-view was invented. I can imagine premium Email services like the ability to withdraw poorly written Emails and automatic replys.
It should be an interesting next ten years.
2. I do not work hard enough. I blame my laziness on boredom. But boredom is self-inflicted. I have to make my work more interesting or stop worrying about being lazy. I will probably stop worrying about being lazy.
3. I now officially have a Masters' degree and a diploma to prove it. I feel no different.
4. I have multiple accounts with Google, but I have never paid Google a dime. I like my relationship with Google. Some politician or wannabe politician will eventually go after Google for its monopolistic behavior, and good things rarely last. But I am happy now.
I also wonder if Google will eventually have to charge. Eventually cable television and pay-per-view was invented. I can imagine premium Email services like the ability to withdraw poorly written Emails and automatic replys.
It should be an interesting next ten years.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
Statistics Everyone Should Know Especially Poor People
1. The lottery is a scam. I have heard a thousand commericials about how the lottery gives so much money to education. I am sure they do but at the expense of people who are bad at math and probably had a poor quality education. It is okay to play once in a while, but never bet your present and future on a one in a 4.7 million chance.
2. Knocking a woman up really has a low probablility. But if you have a lot of sex, then the odds that you impregnate a female increases. So have has much sex as possible, but remember to cover up.
3. An average or a percentage says nothing about an indivdual. Just because five percent of the population is unemployed, does not mean I am unemployed. Just because half of the country thinks something is true does not mean I think it is true, or that it is really true.
So to summarize:
1. Don't continuously bet on long shots.
2. Don't press your luck.
3. Statistics are crap.
2. Knocking a woman up really has a low probablility. But if you have a lot of sex, then the odds that you impregnate a female increases. So have has much sex as possible, but remember to cover up.
3. An average or a percentage says nothing about an indivdual. Just because five percent of the population is unemployed, does not mean I am unemployed. Just because half of the country thinks something is true does not mean I think it is true, or that it is really true.
So to summarize:
1. Don't continuously bet on long shots.
2. Don't press your luck.
3. Statistics are crap.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
What Is Value?
I went to a seminar yesterday. A government funded group had compiled tons of GIS (geograhpical information system basically high quality maps), environmental, and land usage data and people to know about it. The overriding question from the presenters (and the audience) was what do we do with this information to ensure Virginia's environmental sustainability?
One professor made the comment that state agency, environmental groups, and citizen preferences had to be balanced. (I did not ask how could a state agency have preferences, but I should have.) Basically the discussion kept going in circles. Some wanted the preferences of farmers to have the highest weight. Others wanted the ecologist and environmental groups preferences. In the end, nothing was solved. The conclusion was "it is complicated."
But nobody cared about the private owner. No one questioned whether the state had the right to own property.
Positivism cannot answer the fundamental questions of governance. But positivists will try.
One professor made the comment that state agency, environmental groups, and citizen preferences had to be balanced. (I did not ask how could a state agency have preferences, but I should have.) Basically the discussion kept going in circles. Some wanted the preferences of farmers to have the highest weight. Others wanted the ecologist and environmental groups preferences. In the end, nothing was solved. The conclusion was "it is complicated."
But nobody cared about the private owner. No one questioned whether the state had the right to own property.
Positivism cannot answer the fundamental questions of governance. But positivists will try.
Monday, February 26, 2007
The Pagentry Of It All
I watched the Oscars last night. I was torn between the intense jealously from seeing beautiful people and the intense joy from seeing beautiful women. I did not agree with all of the winners, but I really did not give a damn about who won. Well, I did care for video store purposes.
But the hypocrisy of Hollywood and the Left iritated me. The global warming film won numberous awards. Many Hollywoodites considered themselves activists, but they were wearing $10,000 suits and $50,000 dresses. (I actually have no idea what their dresses and suits cost.) How can you claim to care about the poor, global warming, or any other issue that requires sacrifice and be wearing $100,000 worth of jewlry.
I am a libertarian. Hollywoodites should make as much money as they can. They should buy as expensive clothes as they want. But do not stand on a million dollar stage and tell me to sacrifice.
They once had a global warming conference in Japan. American and European scientists jumped on hundreds of planes, burnt tons of jet fuel, and went to Japan for a conference on how to limit global warming.
Non-profit directors and employees get paid huge salaries. Sam says that non-profits need good people, and you get good people by paying them. Again that is fine, but do not fake moral superiority and ask me to sacrifice.
If Al Gore spends $50,000 on a suit and after-parties, then I should be able to spend my $50,000 on a carbon emitting Cheverolet 3500 pick-up truck without his interference.
I comes before you.
But the hypocrisy of Hollywood and the Left iritated me. The global warming film won numberous awards. Many Hollywoodites considered themselves activists, but they were wearing $10,000 suits and $50,000 dresses. (I actually have no idea what their dresses and suits cost.) How can you claim to care about the poor, global warming, or any other issue that requires sacrifice and be wearing $100,000 worth of jewlry.
I am a libertarian. Hollywoodites should make as much money as they can. They should buy as expensive clothes as they want. But do not stand on a million dollar stage and tell me to sacrifice.
They once had a global warming conference in Japan. American and European scientists jumped on hundreds of planes, burnt tons of jet fuel, and went to Japan for a conference on how to limit global warming.
Non-profit directors and employees get paid huge salaries. Sam says that non-profits need good people, and you get good people by paying them. Again that is fine, but do not fake moral superiority and ask me to sacrifice.
If Al Gore spends $50,000 on a suit and after-parties, then I should be able to spend my $50,000 on a carbon emitting Cheverolet 3500 pick-up truck without his interference.
I comes before you.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Things To Do Today
My Dad has this saying on his wall: "Things to do today: My best."
I could never determine what "my best" entails. I always thought it was a meaningless statement. He and I always do our best given the constraints of the situation. And he and I always think we could do better if we could change the constraints.
But I am begining to understand why he likes that saying. It is easy to sit around in fear. Many people live in fear. Academia, bureaucracy, and goverment survives by fear. Everyone is afraid, afaid to fail, afraid to live, afraid to say fuck it.
When you do your best, you do not worry about what "my best" entails. You do not worry about failure. You give a big "fuck you" to fear and all of those who are afraid.
You probably have to be my Dad's age before you can understand "my best." But I can appreicate the sentiment.
I could never determine what "my best" entails. I always thought it was a meaningless statement. He and I always do our best given the constraints of the situation. And he and I always think we could do better if we could change the constraints.
But I am begining to understand why he likes that saying. It is easy to sit around in fear. Many people live in fear. Academia, bureaucracy, and goverment survives by fear. Everyone is afraid, afaid to fail, afraid to live, afraid to say fuck it.
When you do your best, you do not worry about what "my best" entails. You do not worry about failure. You give a big "fuck you" to fear and all of those who are afraid.
You probably have to be my Dad's age before you can understand "my best." But I can appreicate the sentiment.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Things I Have Learned
1. I shaved my full beard. The people who noticed and commented are the people who I want to be like.
2. Ayn Rand said "There are no contradictions." She is right. One cannot avoid all contradictions, but he should recongize and rectify them.
3. Google Calendar is a wonderful thing, if you use it right.
4. A secret in life is to never let anyone offend you. An offended man has no courage. (Hat tip to Jeff on this one.)
5. You can dream. You can read all the books you want. But eventually, you have to wake up and realize everyone has had a shitty asshole and the ability to wipe. You cannot let the people who refuse to wipe bother you.
6. I have not comitted suicide yet. I do not know what that exactly means, but it says something.
2. Ayn Rand said "There are no contradictions." She is right. One cannot avoid all contradictions, but he should recongize and rectify them.
3. Google Calendar is a wonderful thing, if you use it right.
4. A secret in life is to never let anyone offend you. An offended man has no courage. (Hat tip to Jeff on this one.)
5. You can dream. You can read all the books you want. But eventually, you have to wake up and realize everyone has had a shitty asshole and the ability to wipe. You cannot let the people who refuse to wipe bother you.
6. I have not comitted suicide yet. I do not know what that exactly means, but it says something.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Unilateralism Or I Comes Before You
GGM irked me a few weeks ago. He criticized a mutual organization that I (involuntarily) control. He had legitimate points. But he refused to do a damn thing to change the direction of the organization. He was given ample opportunities but refused to participate and enact his ideas.
I idly bitch and complain much more than GGM, but sometimes you have to see someone else making an ass of themselves before you see how asinine your own actions are. One can complain, but eventually, he has to shut up or put up.
Sam called the police on some boy who was walking on a frozen pond earlier this week. I made some comment like "I thought you were a libertarian." He came back with some Christian ethic that requires us to help our fellow man. I came back with: "Why did you call the police? Why didn't you stop and talk to him?" He eventually admitted that his real reason was personal guilt. He was afraid the boy would fall through, die, and he would have to read about it the next morning. He was afraid that the boy's mother's grief would haunt him for the rest of his life.
I do this type of thing all the time. I delegate personal problems and responsiblities to someone else.
Within this discussion lies a problem with our society. We expect someone else or the collective to do something for us. Someone said if I were a true libertarian, I would quit my government job. As long as I work for the government, I cannot complain about the government. I hate it, but she has a point (see note at end).
Sometimes you have to go out on a limb. The United States should do this with free trade and forget the WTO. Successful economists and professionals always do this. They do what they think is right, accept the consequences, and make no apologies. You cannot live a life waiting for others to see the light.
I comes before you.
[Note at end: Don Boudreaux (and I think I have to) has addressed this issue before, and there are arguments (rationalizations) against her proposition. I am not scared to find a non-governmental job, but as long as government handouts exist, why should I deny them. There is a positive and a normative world, and I can separate between them. Like with GGM, I disapproved of her presentation more than her idea.]
I idly bitch and complain much more than GGM, but sometimes you have to see someone else making an ass of themselves before you see how asinine your own actions are. One can complain, but eventually, he has to shut up or put up.
Sam called the police on some boy who was walking on a frozen pond earlier this week. I made some comment like "I thought you were a libertarian." He came back with some Christian ethic that requires us to help our fellow man. I came back with: "Why did you call the police? Why didn't you stop and talk to him?" He eventually admitted that his real reason was personal guilt. He was afraid the boy would fall through, die, and he would have to read about it the next morning. He was afraid that the boy's mother's grief would haunt him for the rest of his life.
I do this type of thing all the time. I delegate personal problems and responsiblities to someone else.
Within this discussion lies a problem with our society. We expect someone else or the collective to do something for us. Someone said if I were a true libertarian, I would quit my government job. As long as I work for the government, I cannot complain about the government. I hate it, but she has a point (see note at end).
Sometimes you have to go out on a limb. The United States should do this with free trade and forget the WTO. Successful economists and professionals always do this. They do what they think is right, accept the consequences, and make no apologies. You cannot live a life waiting for others to see the light.
I comes before you.
[Note at end: Don Boudreaux (and I think I have to) has addressed this issue before, and there are arguments (rationalizations) against her proposition. I am not scared to find a non-governmental job, but as long as government handouts exist, why should I deny them. There is a positive and a normative world, and I can separate between them. Like with GGM, I disapproved of her presentation more than her idea.]
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Counting Crow's "A Murder Of One"
A Murder Of One
Blue morning Blue morning
Wrapped in strands of fist and bone
Curiosity, Kitten,
Doesn't have to mean you're on your own
You can look outside your window
He doesn't have to know
We can talk awhile, baby
We can take it nice and slow
All your life is such a shame, shame, shame
All your love is just a dream, dream, dream
Are you happy where you're sleeping?
Does he keep you safe and warm?
Does he tell you when you're sorry?
Does he tell you when you're wrong?
I've been watching you for hours
It's been years since we were born
We were perfect when we started
I've been wondering where we've gone
All your life is such a shame shame shame
All your love is just a dream dream dream
I dreamt I saw you walking up a hillside in the snow
Casting shadows on the winter sky as you stood there
counting crows
One for sorrow Two for joy
Three for girls and four for boys
Five for silver Six for gold and
Seven for a secret never to be told
There's a bird that nests inside you
Sleeping underneath your skin
When you open up your wings to speak
I wish you'd let me in
All your life is such a shame shame shame
All your love is just a dream dream dream
Open up your eyes
You can see the flames flames flames of your wasted life
You should be ashamed
You don't want to waste your life baby
I walk along these hillsides in the summer 'neath the sunshine
I am feathered by the moonlight falling down on me
Change, change, change
Blue morning Blue morning
Wrapped in strands of fist and bone
Curiosity, Kitten,
Doesn't have to mean you're on your own
You can look outside your window
He doesn't have to know
We can talk awhile, baby
We can take it nice and slow
All your life is such a shame, shame, shame
All your love is just a dream, dream, dream
Are you happy where you're sleeping?
Does he keep you safe and warm?
Does he tell you when you're sorry?
Does he tell you when you're wrong?
I've been watching you for hours
It's been years since we were born
We were perfect when we started
I've been wondering where we've gone
All your life is such a shame shame shame
All your love is just a dream dream dream
I dreamt I saw you walking up a hillside in the snow
Casting shadows on the winter sky as you stood there
counting crows
One for sorrow Two for joy
Three for girls and four for boys
Five for silver Six for gold and
Seven for a secret never to be told
There's a bird that nests inside you
Sleeping underneath your skin
When you open up your wings to speak
I wish you'd let me in
All your life is such a shame shame shame
All your love is just a dream dream dream
Open up your eyes
You can see the flames flames flames of your wasted life
You should be ashamed
You don't want to waste your life baby
I walk along these hillsides in the summer 'neath the sunshine
I am feathered by the moonlight falling down on me
Change, change, change
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Reactionaries
I do not know if I am using the political science definition of reactionaries, but my definition concerns people who think in the short-run. People who do not bother to take the time to fully think out the consequences of their opinions and decisions. People who over-react to situations and immediately call for collective action. We are all reactionaries at times.
Politics is based on reactionaries. Government is influenced and run by people who suddenly care about something that has been going on for years. Something that will work itself out given time. This country has survived years without universal health care or assisted suicide laws. But something happened, and the reactionaries made them political issues.
I could not watch the State of the Union address. I cringed thinking about it. I got sick to my stomach thinking about hearing Bush discuss Iraq, energy, and health care. I got even more sick thinking about the Democratic Congress' response to the State of the Union.
Most things do not matter. It kills people to admit this fact, but when you take a step back, it is all small stuff. Neither Bush nor Congress can do anything about energy or health care. As it has for the past thousands of years, individuals will act and face the consequences of their action.
These actions and consequences will extinguish the need for reactionaries, but I am afraid they will not go away.
Politics is based on reactionaries. Government is influenced and run by people who suddenly care about something that has been going on for years. Something that will work itself out given time. This country has survived years without universal health care or assisted suicide laws. But something happened, and the reactionaries made them political issues.
I could not watch the State of the Union address. I cringed thinking about it. I got sick to my stomach thinking about hearing Bush discuss Iraq, energy, and health care. I got even more sick thinking about the Democratic Congress' response to the State of the Union.
Most things do not matter. It kills people to admit this fact, but when you take a step back, it is all small stuff. Neither Bush nor Congress can do anything about energy or health care. As it has for the past thousands of years, individuals will act and face the consequences of their action.
These actions and consequences will extinguish the need for reactionaries, but I am afraid they will not go away.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Time
I started the year with the goal to write more intelligent and regular blog posts. So far, I have failed. And that is okay.
But I have been reading Thomas Jefferson. The man must have written constantly. And when he was not writing, he must have been reading. He is an excellent example of what one can do without TV. He knew about everything. He wrote about everything.
My Granddad used to buy at big fruit markets. He would get there at about 4:00AM and walk up and down the market until 9:00AM. Anyone whoever went with him used to complain that they "wore out their shoes" following him. No matter what was at the market, he would look at everything. "Walking the market" maximized profits or at least his utility (whatever the hell that means).
But my favorite professor once told me "everyone must specialize, specialize, specialize!"
Specialization scares me. It scares the Office Space generation. I grew up watching Headline News, Sportscenter, and Jeopardy. I know a lot of useless information. I cannot let it go to waste.
Now the best guys know a little about everything. But to get to be one of the best guys in academia or any professional career, you have to specialize and separate yourself. A dissertation that takes on a big subject does not get approved. A young professor who knows a little about a lot does not get any papers published.
But fuck it. I am going to keep "walking the market."
But I have been reading Thomas Jefferson. The man must have written constantly. And when he was not writing, he must have been reading. He is an excellent example of what one can do without TV. He knew about everything. He wrote about everything.
My Granddad used to buy at big fruit markets. He would get there at about 4:00AM and walk up and down the market until 9:00AM. Anyone whoever went with him used to complain that they "wore out their shoes" following him. No matter what was at the market, he would look at everything. "Walking the market" maximized profits or at least his utility (whatever the hell that means).
But my favorite professor once told me "everyone must specialize, specialize, specialize!"
Specialization scares me. It scares the Office Space generation. I grew up watching Headline News, Sportscenter, and Jeopardy. I know a lot of useless information. I cannot let it go to waste.
Now the best guys know a little about everything. But to get to be one of the best guys in academia or any professional career, you have to specialize and separate yourself. A dissertation that takes on a big subject does not get approved. A young professor who knows a little about a lot does not get any papers published.
But fuck it. I am going to keep "walking the market."
Friday, January 19, 2007
Lessons From A Mediocre Seminar
1. Most people are nice. They keep their mouths shut. Other people are not. If the not nice people refuse to shut their mouth, then the presenter should not shut his or her mouth. Or, give the not nice people a stare that reminds them that you can whip their ass.
2. Proofread your presentations. Small errors make the presenter look like an idiot.
3. Do not overwrite or overgraph. Do not do what everyone else does on slides. Too much information is worse than too little. Use the presentation to go beyond the slides.
4. Study, teach, and talk about what you know. I cannot teach an effective class on ballet, menopause, or India. I should not even try.
2. Proofread your presentations. Small errors make the presenter look like an idiot.
3. Do not overwrite or overgraph. Do not do what everyone else does on slides. Too much information is worse than too little. Use the presentation to go beyond the slides.
4. Study, teach, and talk about what you know. I cannot teach an effective class on ballet, menopause, or India. I should not even try.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
My Goals For The First Half Of The Year
By July 1st, 2007,
I will weigh 250 or less pounds. This means I need to drop about 15 pounds. I should be able to do this relatively quickly, but maintaining is the difficult part. It means I must change my diet. Right now, I just need to eat less.
I will bench 275 pounds three sets of eight. In October, I was doing three sets of five. Right now, I am probably at threes or fours. So I should be able to do this relatively quickly also.
I will bench 225 pounds three sets of fifteen. In October, I was doing sets of ten. This will be more of a mental challenge than anything else. I expect this will take a while.
I will be able to walk up the stairs to my office without being winded. I have been doing cardio exercise in small doses, but I must find the time to do more for more extended periods of time.
I will live an active lifestyle. I will walk up stairs instead of using the elevator. I will ride the bus or walk instead of driving. I will take walks instead of napping. I will participate in more recreational sports.
I wish myself good luck.
I will weigh 250 or less pounds. This means I need to drop about 15 pounds. I should be able to do this relatively quickly, but maintaining is the difficult part. It means I must change my diet. Right now, I just need to eat less.
I will bench 275 pounds three sets of eight. In October, I was doing three sets of five. Right now, I am probably at threes or fours. So I should be able to do this relatively quickly also.
I will bench 225 pounds three sets of fifteen. In October, I was doing sets of ten. This will be more of a mental challenge than anything else. I expect this will take a while.
I will be able to walk up the stairs to my office without being winded. I have been doing cardio exercise in small doses, but I must find the time to do more for more extended periods of time.
I will live an active lifestyle. I will walk up stairs instead of using the elevator. I will ride the bus or walk instead of driving. I will take walks instead of napping. I will participate in more recreational sports.
I wish myself good luck.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Gladwell and Hayek
I finally finished Hayek's The Counter-Revolution of Science. It is a great introduction to what is wrong with social sciences and social scientists. It is deep, and maybe even over researched, but Hayek admits that the only objective observer of mankind is God. A PhD does not qualify you as an objective observer of men. Most people with PhDs do not understand this point.
Bill Simmons at ESPN.com pointed me to Malcolm Gladwell's new article in the New Yorker about mysteries and puzzles. The article is also deep and a little overwritten, but it hits in a similar vein as Hayek. We cannot know everything.
Life is a mystery, so is economics.
I suggest people read Gladwell's article. I might comment more later.
Bill Simmons at ESPN.com pointed me to Malcolm Gladwell's new article in the New Yorker about mysteries and puzzles. The article is also deep and a little overwritten, but it hits in a similar vein as Hayek. We cannot know everything.
Life is a mystery, so is economics.
I suggest people read Gladwell's article. I might comment more later.
Friday, January 05, 2007
Sad Men
I am trying to change in the lockeroom. I am trying to keep my eyes up as the old men parade around naked. I am so sore from squatting that I want to cry. I am afraid I am going to cramp while I am naked.
Then this guy whose skin is blood red sneaks up to this other guy who has a locker near mine. Red Guy says "I have new favorite exercise."
My Neighbor replies "Oh, what is it?" He asks it in a way that demonstrates that he is a little scared of this conversation's potential.
"Oh, the sauna. You know, last weekend, I talked to my wife. We might be able to reconcile." Red guy breaks the code of the lockeroom. If he had had sex, then this would be a fine conversation, but they just took a walk and talked.
My Neighbor placates Red Guy, and gives some words of encouragement. Red Guy could not find the courage to even say "thank you."
The story has no real point, but I am going to bullshit for another few paragraphs.
I felt sorry for Red Guy, but he also scared the hell out of me.
I know women can turn men into whipped dogs. I know love is a powerful thing. I know losing love is a devastating thing. But you cannot dump your feelings on a guy in the lockeroom when he is half-dressed. Somethings you have to discuss in private.
This is stupid. I am scared, because I do not want to be Red Guy. I am scared, because things do not always work out the way according to plans.
It is okay to be scared, but you have to find confidence in your ability to survive and adapt.
Today, I am confident in my ability to survive and adapt.
I do not know about tomorrow. But that is okay.
Then this guy whose skin is blood red sneaks up to this other guy who has a locker near mine. Red Guy says "I have new favorite exercise."
My Neighbor replies "Oh, what is it?" He asks it in a way that demonstrates that he is a little scared of this conversation's potential.
"Oh, the sauna. You know, last weekend, I talked to my wife. We might be able to reconcile." Red guy breaks the code of the lockeroom. If he had had sex, then this would be a fine conversation, but they just took a walk and talked.
My Neighbor placates Red Guy, and gives some words of encouragement. Red Guy could not find the courage to even say "thank you."
The story has no real point, but I am going to bullshit for another few paragraphs.
I felt sorry for Red Guy, but he also scared the hell out of me.
I know women can turn men into whipped dogs. I know love is a powerful thing. I know losing love is a devastating thing. But you cannot dump your feelings on a guy in the lockeroom when he is half-dressed. Somethings you have to discuss in private.
This is stupid. I am scared, because I do not want to be Red Guy. I am scared, because things do not always work out the way according to plans.
It is okay to be scared, but you have to find confidence in your ability to survive and adapt.
Today, I am confident in my ability to survive and adapt.
I do not know about tomorrow. But that is okay.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
A Potential Health Care Study
Some colleges and high schools require "wellness" or health classes. Other colleges and high schools do not. It would be interesting to compare health data for graduates for these competing schools (controlling for other possible effects). Basically you run a dummy variable in your regression telling whether the person had a class emphasizing health or not.
My and GGM's hypothesis is those students who went through organized classes on "wellness" are no better off than those students who did not.
I am curious to hear Sam's and Jeff's thoughts about this idea and their hypotheses. I am also curious to know if someone has already done this study.
Notice I understand that measuring health is complicated. I think BMI is a poor measure. To measure health correctly, you have to look at a variety of features, but this post represents an idea not a master plan. Also everyone knows my distrust of statistics and regression equations, but I am curious.
My and GGM's hypothesis is those students who went through organized classes on "wellness" are no better off than those students who did not.
I am curious to hear Sam's and Jeff's thoughts about this idea and their hypotheses. I am also curious to know if someone has already done this study.
Notice I understand that measuring health is complicated. I think BMI is a poor measure. To measure health correctly, you have to look at a variety of features, but this post represents an idea not a master plan. Also everyone knows my distrust of statistics and regression equations, but I am curious.
Monday, January 01, 2007
A Conversation Between Sam And I
The conversation started with this article.
Sam starts off:
However, the more I read about the subjective theory of value the less convincing and satisfactory it seems.
While I don't mean to get engaged in too great a debate about what makes for a "good" theory this seems to punt on every aspect of market price. As James Buchanan once put, "The result of the market process is the result of the market process." What about Frank Knight's idea of all costs being opportunity costs? If with an hour's worth of effort a man can obtain one deer or two beavers, the price ratio of beavers to deer should be 2 to 1. Not because it is some whimsical happenstance but because there exists an opportunity for arbitrage. The neoclassical ideas of production cost and utility being the two edges of a pair of scissors hemming in the price makes more intuitive sense if you ask me.
Certainly there are exceptions where the Austrian story fits better, rare art work leaps to mind, but the price of nails, chicken or gasoline fits the neoclassical story much better than the subjective theory of value. I have no love for gasoline, I do however enjoy seeing my family during the holidays.
--Sam
The scissors of demand and supply is a great teaching tool. Most people think prices are given by God or decided by evil corporations. Demand and supply is a much better explanation than these mystical interpretations of price, but demand and supply functions do not exist in any tractable form.
The Buchanan example works better when you only have beavers and deer and identical consumers, but add microwaves, toasters, prostitutes, and people with varying preferences. This is why Buchanan could not get his point across. I have no idea my value for a cook until a cook exists. Neo-classicals and their prevalent methodology cannot incorporate new cooks into their models.
The real problem with objective theories of value is the paternalism and socialism they suggest. Once you say nails should cost $X, then you are suggesting that if they do not then it requires collective action.
Answer this, why do nails have different prices at the local hardware store than they do at Lowe's or Home Depot? It is not by transaction costs alone. There is a little subjective theory of value there.
You do love what gasoline can do for you. We (like the Austrians and Neo-classicals) are arguing trivialities, but that is what academics do.
~WB
I think you have asked just the right question. Why is it that nails atone store are cheaper than another?
The economist jobs is to be able to explain, and hopefully predict, the answer to questions like this. I stick by my original answer that the economists role is to help society understand trade offs between policies and look for ways to reduce transactions costs. The subjective theory of value is useless on this front. We might as well just throw our hands up in the air and say we have no idea how any of it works and aren't especially interested in figuring it out. Why might one store have cheaper nails than another. Perhaps they have economies of scale and can out compete their neighbor. Maybe its just a gimmick to get people in their store so they buy other higher margin items.
As economists I think we should be looking at our theories and working on developing new ones, game theory sounds like a good choice for modeling gimmicks, to explain and understand our world. The world will never fit neatly into any theory but that doesn't let us off the hook to continue looking.
--Sam
This is where we disagree. I agree that economists illuminate tradeoffs, but you automatically jump into policy, society, and"reducing transaction costs."
The subjective theory of value tells economists exactly what to do. Let people do whatever the hell they please. I listened to Walter Williams for three hours going down to Raleigh, and he kept saying the same thing over and over again, limited government, limited government. I think it is a worthy claim to make.
You go to Small Town Hardware Store and ask Rick why he prices the nails the way he does, and then go to Medium Sized Hardware and ask Bob why he prices nails the way he does. I am sure they both have reasons, but they are different and based on competing rationales. And you will never be able to formalize these differences. And it would be foolish and a waste of money to try. Now if Rick or Bob is willing to pay you to figure out the optimal price for nails then that is okay. But if Senator Joe pays with my Dad's tax dollars, then I have a problem.
~WB
Sam starts off:
However, the more I read about the subjective theory of value the less convincing and satisfactory it seems.
While I don't mean to get engaged in too great a debate about what makes for a "good" theory this seems to punt on every aspect of market price. As James Buchanan once put, "The result of the market process is the result of the market process." What about Frank Knight's idea of all costs being opportunity costs? If with an hour's worth of effort a man can obtain one deer or two beavers, the price ratio of beavers to deer should be 2 to 1. Not because it is some whimsical happenstance but because there exists an opportunity for arbitrage. The neoclassical ideas of production cost and utility being the two edges of a pair of scissors hemming in the price makes more intuitive sense if you ask me.
Certainly there are exceptions where the Austrian story fits better, rare art work leaps to mind, but the price of nails, chicken or gasoline fits the neoclassical story much better than the subjective theory of value. I have no love for gasoline, I do however enjoy seeing my family during the holidays.
--Sam
The scissors of demand and supply is a great teaching tool. Most people think prices are given by God or decided by evil corporations. Demand and supply is a much better explanation than these mystical interpretations of price, but demand and supply functions do not exist in any tractable form.
The Buchanan example works better when you only have beavers and deer and identical consumers, but add microwaves, toasters, prostitutes, and people with varying preferences. This is why Buchanan could not get his point across. I have no idea my value for a cook until a cook exists. Neo-classicals and their prevalent methodology cannot incorporate new cooks into their models.
The real problem with objective theories of value is the paternalism and socialism they suggest. Once you say nails should cost $X, then you are suggesting that if they do not then it requires collective action.
Answer this, why do nails have different prices at the local hardware store than they do at Lowe's or Home Depot? It is not by transaction costs alone. There is a little subjective theory of value there.
You do love what gasoline can do for you. We (like the Austrians and Neo-classicals) are arguing trivialities, but that is what academics do.
~WB
I think you have asked just the right question. Why is it that nails atone store are cheaper than another?
The economist jobs is to be able to explain, and hopefully predict, the answer to questions like this. I stick by my original answer that the economists role is to help society understand trade offs between policies and look for ways to reduce transactions costs. The subjective theory of value is useless on this front. We might as well just throw our hands up in the air and say we have no idea how any of it works and aren't especially interested in figuring it out. Why might one store have cheaper nails than another. Perhaps they have economies of scale and can out compete their neighbor. Maybe its just a gimmick to get people in their store so they buy other higher margin items.
As economists I think we should be looking at our theories and working on developing new ones, game theory sounds like a good choice for modeling gimmicks, to explain and understand our world. The world will never fit neatly into any theory but that doesn't let us off the hook to continue looking.
--Sam
This is where we disagree. I agree that economists illuminate tradeoffs, but you automatically jump into policy, society, and"reducing transaction costs."
The subjective theory of value tells economists exactly what to do. Let people do whatever the hell they please. I listened to Walter Williams for three hours going down to Raleigh, and he kept saying the same thing over and over again, limited government, limited government. I think it is a worthy claim to make.
You go to Small Town Hardware Store and ask Rick why he prices the nails the way he does, and then go to Medium Sized Hardware and ask Bob why he prices nails the way he does. I am sure they both have reasons, but they are different and based on competing rationales. And you will never be able to formalize these differences. And it would be foolish and a waste of money to try. Now if Rick or Bob is willing to pay you to figure out the optimal price for nails then that is okay. But if Senator Joe pays with my Dad's tax dollars, then I have a problem.
~WB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)