Marginal Revolution: Saturday's links

November
S	M	T	W	Th	F	St
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

« What I've been reading | Main | Richard Musgrave passes away at 96 »

Saturday's links

1. New blog on the global economy

2. Why are condoms so expensive?

3. Is daydreaming the brain's default mode?

4. The evolution of Manhattan; I miss the real city I once knew

5. The Fermi paradox: where are we? Via Jason Kottke.

6. Mexico's doctors smoke at higher-than-average rates

7. Ron Paul for President?

Posted by Tyler Cowen on January 20, 2007 at 08:25 AM in Web/Tech | Permalink

Comments

With regard to the Fermi paradox - the linked article makes a lot of sense. In response to "is there other life out there or are we all alone?" the most likely answer is "yes."

Posted by: tom s. at Jan 20, 2007 8:59:00 AM

Regarding the Manhattan article - the author writes, "What makes the idea of ascending from City Hall to the White House possible is the transformation of New York in the past twenty years—one of the largest civic transformations in American history, and certainly the most unexpected. (Theories credit everything from bright new waves of immigrants to grim forced marches of incarceration, and the sociologists can’t decide which is right.)"

Borjas's article that links immigration to Black male incarceration would say both are right.

Posted by: Jason Voorhees at Jan 20, 2007 9:04:20 AM

RE the Fermi paradox. The time between the Wright brothers getting us off the ground in powered flight to sending two Pioneer probes through the heliopause, which defines the beginning of interstellar space, is just one hundred years. We are on our way.

Posted by: Fred at Jan 20, 2007 10:21:50 AM

Manhattan's "transformation" is greatly exaggerated. Due to NYC regulations that prohibit, prohibit, and prohibit -- the landscape is basically the same as ever, from the relative lack of decent "chain stores" (the banned Costco is a good example) to the lack of public toilets (still working their way through the ever-increasing bureaucracy). Even the subways, though cosmetically improved, are still full of vagrants and mentally-unstable people sticking their cups in your face or otherwise creating a hostile atmosphere.

What has changed is the demand to live in Manhattan. Bluntly put, the new residents are less likely to commit violent crimes against their neighbors. And so, you can now walk through Union Square with a greater assurance of not being robbed.

But these people also like Starbucks, and not the nasty "mom and pop" luncheonettes. The new Home Depots are also far superior to the repellent little hardware stores. Of course, some prefer the latter, and move to Bushwick or Red Hook in Brooklyn -- at least until they need to find a school for their kids, or find themselves on the receiving end of some youthful pummeling on their way home from work.

And, of course, the biggest impediments to any so-called "transformation" are the public housing projects. To the nostalgic, these permaslums guarantee that NYC will always keep its "old charm". But that's also the reason why the areas of Manhattan north of 96th Street (especially on the east side) will never improve. There is no need to fear developers converting the projects into condos.

The insulated people of Manhattan fail to see how the rest of the city is still deteriorating. Jackson Heights, for example, was recently a middle-class area -- and is now over-packed with Asian immigrants. That's great for an exotic meal, but not great for people who want to live in a clean and quiet environment. They have left NYC for the suburbs. And someday, the children of these Asian immigrants will also leave.

The affluent island of Manhattan is precarious. Many workers live elsewhere and those who live in Manhattan have largely not "settled down" yet. Manhattan is largely a big playground for them -- wait until their kids are school-age. And there is no evidence of a mass migration from the suburbs -- if Westchester, Long Island and New Jersey real estate values are any indication.

BTW, if the author of that article really misses the old New York, he should move a few stops north on the #2 Train. There's plenty of old New York left for him there. He better carry enough cash in his wallet to placate his predators, though...

Posted by: Bill Nelson at Jan 20, 2007 11:04:54 AM

The exponential/quadratic growth postulated in the Fermi Paradox doesn't engage until we have a colony in a second star's planetary system, and that colony's economy has progressed to the point where it produces its own colonization starships.

-dk

Posted by: Dick King at Jan 20, 2007 11:05:08 AM

Dick King,
Given enough time (e.g., a few million years), why is this a restrictive consideration? Even the linked article doesn't explain all that much to me: sure, aliens wouldn't have had time to contact us if there's only one interstellar species. But assuming there are only a couple intelligent species in the galaxy is not all that far from assuming there's only one.

Posted by: ryan at Jan 20, 2007 1:09:39 PM

Rasmus Bjoerk's paper is idiotic. He does not use exponential growth in his approach to searching. An easier, but essentially equivalent question is: if aliens did not want to find us, how long would it take?

Here's a short paper on how even an exponential search can fail:
Osame Kinouchi
"Persistence solves Fermi Paradox but challenges SETI projects"
"Suppose that you are a member of a lost Amazonian tribe that has never been contacted. Now, it is obvious that a technological civilization able to perform travel by air at 1000 km/hour certainly had time to colonize the entire globe. But since they have not reached you (remember, you are a member of a undiscovered Ianomani tribe), should you conclude that there is no such global civilization?"

Posted by: Douglas Knight at Jan 20, 2007 3:40:11 PM

I always buy the 36-pack of condoms, extra large. The rubber bands I buy on-line.

- Josh

Posted by: Wild Pegasus at Jan 20, 2007 4:14:36 PM

Great analysis of condom pricing. It falls (thankfully) just short of a major condom spiracy theory but illustrates some wonderful economic points - mainly in the hypotheses:

- the high value which may be placed on discretion
- the failure of "one size fits all" marketing and distribution
- the extreme lengths distributors and marketers are prepared to go to match niche demands

I see no evidence of "unjustified costs".

The apparent absence of a co op in the form suggested may evidence the high costs of collective condom action and free riding.

Good spotting Tyler.

Posted by: Brent at Jan 20, 2007 7:19:02 PM

Sex is so much more expensive than the cost of a condom that a condom like the radio in a Ferrari doesn't seem expensive even at a staggering mark ups. Me I buy condoms in packs of 100. It works out to about $.25 each and if I can't go through 100 in a year or two I have bigger problems.

Posted by: Michael F at Jan 20, 2007 8:28:18 PM

Never pay for condoms. They give them away for free at Planned Parenthood offices. They even supply paper bags so you can grab dozens at a time if you want.

Posted by: Asa at Jan 21, 2007 3:22:51 PM

I think the big reason consumers are willing to pay more for less in the condom case is because the condoms
in the stores are so convenient. It takes a lot less time to go to the store than it does to order them. The consumer does not realize that if he bought the condoms in bulk, he could pay less for each condom. The consumer failing to do the math I believe relates back to being convenient. The consumer substitutes
price for conveniency.

Posted by: Tyler Kirkpatrick at Jan 21, 2007 6:49:51 PM

Two reforms that would help all of New York, not just Manhattan, would be to
legalize street drugs and to take a page from Maggie Thatcher's playbook by
privatizing the welfare housing. Let welfare housing tenants become owners,
declare a fifteen-year (or longer) property tax moratorium on these properties.
The NYCHA bureaucracy would scream bloody murder and oppose it to the bitter
end, but overcoming their opposition would be a cheap price to pay for improving
the lives of the underclass, and everyone else.
A friend of mine just bought a place in Jackson Heights and says it's quite
livable. His young son goes to a very good private school, which is close by.

There are many other reforms that would help, such as cutting taxes and red tape.
(The bureaucracy and regulations developers have to negotiate in New York is
insane.) Improving the subways would also be high on the list.

Posted by: Bill Stepp at Jan 21, 2007 9:20:49 PM

Give me self replicating probes that can move at 1% the speed of light and I'll search the galaxy for you
in under 10 million years. The trick is to send one of your first probes on a trip to the far side
of the galaxy.

Posted by: Ronald Brak at Jan 22, 2007 1:58:30 AM

As Ronald noted, the fermi paradox article was a bit of a fizzle. The author started by ruling out self-replication; the paradox depends entirely on replication.

Posted by: John Faughnan at Jan 22, 2007 10:34:25 PM

H i
B e s t w i s h e s。
Allow me to offer my heartiest wishes.
常年提供高、中、低压锅炉无缝管、流体无缝管、结构无缝管、化肥专用钢管、石油裂化无缝钢管、
地质钢管、液压支柱钢管
合金钢管
 无缝管
 无缝钢管
等论文发表资讯/刊物信息，协助客户制定论文发表方案.
x i c a o l o v e s
l o v e s x i c a o
网站优化
 google优化
 网站优化
 搜索引擎优化
 网站优化
 搜索引擎优化
 百度优化
 SEO