« Farewell to Alms, final session | Main | Economics majors are rising »
Request for requests
Loyal readers: I can promise only weak monotonicity in my response, but what topics or questions or books or whatever would you like to see covered on MR?
Posted by Tyler Cowen on September 12, 2007 at 11:11 AM in Web/Tech | Permalink
Comments
How about a book club (a la 'Farewell to Alms') on one of your older books, particularly if you have subsequently revised your opinion, or have developed some themes on a subject since publishing?
Nick
Posted by: nick at Sep 12, 2007 11:22:34 AM
Tyler,
I am interested in decision-making. Whether the principles of economics can help us navigate the reefs of our self-deception, whether the rational animal can transcend the self-preserving animal, etc.
Posted by: Deron Bauman at Sep 12, 2007 11:28:15 AM
I'd be interested to read about the relationship between civil liberties and economics. I'm not sure how to be more specific, but I'm sure you can just let the subject go where it will go. Thanks.
Posted by: Willy at Sep 12, 2007 11:30:51 AM
I would like to see more about the role of blogs in scholarship.
Posted by: Seth Gitter at Sep 12, 2007 11:33:33 AM
What areas of economics would you want to work in if you were a graduate student today? What current economics research topics currently interest you the most? Or any other advice to economics students at the start of the dissertation writing stage.
Posted by: noto at Sep 12, 2007 11:33:54 AM
The effects on those elements of human interaction classified as "Economic" by the continued acceleration of collectivization and by the forces generating that collectivization. Any writers on that? Any publishers?
Posted by: R. Richard Schweitzer at Sep 12, 2007 11:35:28 AM
As for books, I'm currently reading (well listening to)"Giving" by Bill Clinton. It's a mixed bag about non-governmental ways to improve the lot of the poor in the world thru private initiative. He mixes good and bad points into an interesting read.
For the sake of balance and using Clinton himself to show another way of enacting good change without the government, it's a good book to view in this light.
Just a thought.
Posted by: John at Sep 12, 2007 11:38:31 AM
Healthcare economics seems to draw a lot of comments so I think that it would be a good topic.
Also lately I have been thinking of the idea of relative income in a different way from most people. I have toyed with the idea that maybe many people spend more on housing than they otherwise would to avoid being in a bad neighborhoods. Making use work harder and enjoy less leasure than we otherwise would. This turns the idea of the dangers of relative wealth on its head. So how about a discussion of the economics of relative wealth, subsidizing of the poor, sloppiness and crime and how they all interact.
Also how do state and county slow growth policies affect real-estate prices?
Posted by: Floccina at Sep 12, 2007 11:39:07 AM
As for books, I'm currently reading (well listening to)"Giving" by Bill Clinton. It's a mixed bag about non-governmental ways to improve the lot of the poor in the world thru private initiative. He mixes good and bad points into an interesting read.
For the sake of balance and using Clinton himself to show another way of enacting good change without the government, it's a good book to view in this light.
Just a thought.
Posted by: John at Sep 12, 2007 11:39:55 AM
Explain the government's role in the dramatic increase in college tuition over the past 20 years ... and the scandals around student loans that have been in the popular press.
Posted by: RTS at Sep 12, 2007 11:44:50 AM
I'm interested in the topic of the 'eat local' movement.
For example:
2 city families pledge: Eat 'local'
"(September 11, 2007) — It's dinnertime. Do you know where the food on your table comes from?
Two Rochester households are taking the Eat Local Challenge, pledging to eat primarily within their foodshed for all or part of this month.
Taste and freshness are the most common reasons people buy locally grown foods."
http://rochesterdandc.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070911/LIVING/709110309
Posted by: Chris Meisenzahl at Sep 12, 2007 11:48:55 AM
How about a suggestion for how to fix the following problem of misplaced incentives: I work in an office with a staff of 14. Clearly, all the work could be done competently and reliably by a staff of 8 or 9. My job could easily be consolidated into another, with no loss of efficiency. This would create very substantial cost-savings. However, it is not immediately apparent to managers that all of this is the case. I would have to point out that I am redundant, and of course I would reap none of the rewards of cost-savings for pointing out my own redundancy and would, in fact, lose my job (actually I wouldn't because this is a public institution, but you get the point). How could we structure a system where I had an incentive to point out my own redundancy and advocate for more efficient labor usage instead of just hanging on tightly to my easy easy job and obfuscating the fact that I only work 3 hours out of the 8.
Posted by: David at Sep 12, 2007 11:53:52 AM
Topics (they're somewhat specific, but of interest to me):
The impact of internet, Web 2.0, etc., on the way we do business.
Buyer and seller behavior in the automotive market.
Economic decision-making as it relates to marriage and having children.
Analysis on the things that polarize us in the US (politics, socio-economic levels, race, gender, geography, etc.).
Debunking conventional wisdom on various economic topics.
Posted by: econ2econ at Sep 12, 2007 11:56:43 AM
Krueger's new book on terrorism might be fun. It's short, too.
Posted by: jason voorhees at Sep 12, 2007 12:01:14 PM
David,
Not to hijack the thread, but yours is an interesting point that we've talked about in my organization. Our philosophy is that everyone should be working to eliminate their own jobs. The theory being that when you improve efficiency, time and effort can be devoted to other things. It works better in an orgnazation whose goals are to continue to increase production. Since you are in a public institution, that may not be the goal, thus your problem persists.
Posted by: econ2econ at Sep 12, 2007 12:01:50 PM
As to books. Jude Wanniski's, The Way The World Works.
Posted by: russ at Sep 12, 2007 12:04:48 PM
How about the Paris bike sharing program?
Posted by: VC at Sep 12, 2007 12:16:08 PM
I think a book forum for some classic economics books (Keynes' General Theory or The Wealth of Nations for example) would be very helpful.
Posted by: Steven Bass at Sep 12, 2007 12:25:45 PM
How about a post on Ludwig Lachmann?
Posted by: Brad at Sep 12, 2007 12:27:32 PM
Would love to see more detailed accounts of your travels.
Posted by: CD at Sep 12, 2007 12:36:07 PM
I particularly development stuff, emerging economy, the Chinese influence, Africa. The nuggets you throw in about behavioural economics is also fresh keep up the good work.
Omodudu.
Posted by: omodudu at Sep 12, 2007 12:37:27 PM
I'd love to see you folks comment upon the major presidential candidates' economic policy proposals, for the pragmatic reason that your comments might influence ever so slightly those candidates' ideas.
Posted by: Jim Garland at Sep 12, 2007 12:38:02 PM
Electoral College (or generally election systems).
The economics of religion - promising research programs within it.
Flat tax - a desirable model?
Transition economies - what went right, what went wrong, could it have gone better? (In particular Eastern Germany in the doldrums)
If the whole Latin America dollarized, would it affect the US economy? How would it change the US monetary policy?
Homeschooling - a positive alternative, or could it be dangerous (on the larger scale) because parents impose their beliefs and prejudices on their kids, thereby hampering their socialization?
Posted by: J at Sep 12, 2007 12:39:00 PM
Personally, I'd like to read about why I'm so awesome.
Posted by: Phil at Sep 12, 2007 12:41:25 PM
I would be interested in your perspectives on the different career trajectories for people coming out in economics, law and economics, and public policy.
Posted by: davidg at Sep 12, 2007 12:41:58 PM
I would be very interested in some exercises in intellectual autobiography, e.g. how was your environment, intellectually speaking, during childhood and adolescence? What were your interests back then? Books that caught your attention early on; books and authors that shaped your worldview.
Also, you could give some advice to young people regarding what to read in their teens, what kind of study discipline is required to become a scholar, including time management.
Posted by: Diogo at Sep 12, 2007 12:48:57 PM
This morning I was unlucky enough to catch a segment of The Today Show. A psychologist described games and incentives for effective child-rearing and discipline (shredding CD's, smiley faces, crap like that). How should I raise my kids without making them feel manipulated or controlled? This topic has been given some lip service in passing but real-life anecdotes in this area are quite welcome.
Posted by: shirley at Sep 12, 2007 12:51:18 PM
Interesting you should ask, since just yesterday I posted that it would be interesting to see an economic discussion of whether it's worthwhile to complete phone-in restaurant surveys for a chance at a prize.
Posted by: JohnMcG at Sep 12, 2007 12:57:00 PM
I would very much appreciate something on the following topic as part of your advice for graduates in economics topic:
What are the boundaries of "economics" as a science according to graduate schools in general and perhaps GMU in particular (i.e. where topics such as "economic history" are not a subset of "economics" but of "history")? What about in particular fields such as Austrian economics? (Do the boundaries shift?) What are the options for interdisciplinary work?
When does someone get left out in the cold because their work is too interdisciplinary? If you are, for example, not as strong in math, should you focus early, take the minimum amount of math and carve out a spot in your niche or are you risking being considered fringe and unorthodox?
Thanks!
Posted by: liberty at Sep 12, 2007 12:58:31 PM
I have a specific question I'd love to see discussed- apologies for the lengthy exposition...
We all know that using pure market logic it is hard to defend the concept of minimum wage- It seems clear that if the cost of labor goes up, the demand for hiring people will go down; ergo, unemployment goes up. Hence, minimum wage is a Bad Idea.
I'm not going to argue that (I can't- it's too good of an argument) but I think there's a serious problem with this answer- Maybe you could think of this as some kind of "meta" argument on my part...
It goes like this: Clearly, there's _some_ things economists understand better than _other_ things. Hence, there will always be a tendency to look for descriptions to situations by using those parts of economic theory that economists are most comfortable with (this ties in with the idea of "incentives" in your new book...)
We're all familiar with allegories that deal with this: For instance, the joke about the guy who loses his keys at night and only looks for them under the street light, even though he lost them on the other side of the street- this is the only place he can see clearly. Or, the adage that "if you own a hammer everything looks like a nail."
Bottom line is that it's possible that by using the ideas of "supply and demand" to explain why "raising the minimum wage does not help low wage workers" is just a knee-jerk reaction by economists that overlooks possible other economic theories that might give different answers (I'm not saying this is necessarily the case, just that the possibility exists) and that they do this simply because it's a well understood idea whereas other economic ideas saying "minimum wage _does_ help" are just unknown by economists or at least not as well understood and harder to defend. These possible theories are what Rumsfeld might have called "the unknown unknowns"
So, let's look at our goal: The goal is to financially assist low wage workers.
Here's the answers I often hear to this problem:
ECONOMIST: "Well, you can't help them by raising the minimum wage, because, according to economic theory...etc etc."
PERSON ON STREET: "Well, if you want to financially assist low wage workers then you obviously would want to give them more money."
I find it extremely hard to dismiss that second argument: It's ridiculously simple, and simple solutions usually are more true (ala Occam's Razor)... "They need money? Give them money!"
It also lacks the danger of "unknown unknowns" that is intrinsic in the use of economic theories- I think most economists (since most are not, as the joke goes, "one handed") would agree that there's always a huge risk of unknown factors in making economic predictions...
Anyway, this issue has always bothered me because I like the "supply and demand" answer but can't argue against my friends who have a much crisper, simpler defense of the opposite position...
Thoughts?
Posted by: Conrad Barski at Sep 12, 2007 1:02:18 PM
I'd like to see something on Irving Fisher's "The Theory of Interest". Also something on mental accounting.
Posted by: Dennis Mangan at Sep 12, 2007 1:04:20 PM
The Medieval Machine by Jean Gimpel (About the industrial revolution during the Middle Ages.)
Native Stranger by Eddy L. Harris (A Black American travels through Africa and tries to live as the Africans do. At one point he refuses to grovel like the locals do and spends a month in a Liberian prison.)
Posted by: Alex J. at Sep 12, 2007 1:04:34 PM
Like econ2econ, I'd like to see some analysis of marriage and mate-selection
Posted by: Larry at Sep 12, 2007 1:08:53 PM
Like econ2econ, I'd like to see some analysis of marriage and mate-selection
Posted by: Larry at Sep 12, 2007 1:09:04 PM
alternatives to using petroleum powered vehicles for commuting, including bicycles, electric cars, etc.
Posted by: chug at Sep 12, 2007 1:10:38 PM
I would like to see you do a more indepth analysis of Neil Strauss and "The Game." This would be a good time to bring it up against as VH1 has a new reality show based around a variant of this method. The show is sometimes in bad taste, as it focuses a lot on making fun of the guys who are learning how to pick up girls. There are some very complicated signaling issues in that realm that you glossed over/ignored in your book/last blog entry. You treated the strategy as a pure "hard to get" approach and ignored everything else about the strategy - even the academic research you cited in refutation to Neil Strauss ignored the basic rule "Look at what the girls do, not at what they say."
Posted by: agent00yak at Sep 12, 2007 1:11:15 PM
Is there a causal relationship between economic ideas and historical events, or does economics only provide cover for other motives. See Marx and communism, Keynes and socialism, Hayek/Friedman and deregulation/privatization.
Posted by: bastiat at Sep 12, 2007 1:15:43 PM
More discussion of the ethical foundations of economics and economic policy decisions.
Posted by: Mike at Sep 12, 2007 1:16:25 PM
I'd love to see more macroeconomic analysis. Coverage of governmental reports versus the reality of the marketplace. Also more microeconomic stuff - how macro policy is affecting people across the class spectrum. For instance: my groceries have gotten really expensive lately. Is there data to correlate fruit prices with recent bee scares? And what's up with Papua New Guinea these days?
Posted by: sdbrown at Sep 12, 2007 1:16:54 PM
ditto agent00yak
Also, can you explain your fondness for Amartya Sen and what he has to say that's so important? As far as I can tell, his "deep" insights are basically:
-Democracies don't have famines [insert long list of vague qualifiers].
-Libertarianism can't be efficient because of this theorem I proved, which assumes no one can trade.
-You have to have some capabilities to make use of your rights, and libertarians have formed their theories in complete ignorance of this.
-The cynical public choice arguments are flawed because I don't want to believe democracy works like that. After all, people don't lie to you about where the post office is.
As far as I can tell, he's all hype.
Posted by: Person at Sep 12, 2007 1:20:20 PM
I'm sure many of us readers think about a potential future career as a professor. So:
-Describe the average professor's worklife. Is it really as flexible as it seems? How much vacation time per year, for instance? How often can you combine work-related travel with pleasure? Is life as a professor relatively less stressful than other jobs? You get my drift. Feel free to expand on any of these ideas.
Posted by: dave at Sep 12, 2007 1:27:18 PM
Discover Your Inner Economist
I think most of your readers would enjoy an interactive session with you about the book.
Other ideas:
What Price the Moral High Ground?: Ethical Dilemmas in Competitive Environments by Robert H. Frank
Haven't read it yet, but it's always interesting to mix economics with moral and ethical issues.
The Myth of the Rational Voter by Bryan Caplan
I think it would be interesting to hear a critique of the ideas put forth in this one. I'm sure you could convince Bryan to participate as well.
Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics by Eric D. Beinhocker
I found it pretty interesting, but since a lot of it is just about latest trends in economics research, it may not have enough to debate and it is rather long (527 pages hardcover).
Also, I'm about to read What Makes a Terrorist: Economics and the Roots of Terrorism (Lionel Robbins Lectures) by Alan B. Krueger and Choice and Consequence by Thomas C. Schelling, so those would be convenient for me...
Posted by: Dave at Sep 12, 2007 1:32:32 PM
Comrade Barski,
If life were that obvious ("poor people need more money - or food - lets have government give it to them") then socialism would have been Utopian.
What your friends are forgetting is scarcity - there is no free lunch.
Posted by: liberty at Sep 12, 2007 1:33:11 PM
Can one trust econometric studies, eg of what causes growth? I personally don't (unless it analyses the result of a natural experiment or something similar) but would love to be persuaded otherwise.
How much insight does GE theory give? On the margin, should it be taught more or less? On the margin, should there be more or less research in it?
Posted by: Johan Richter at Sep 12, 2007 1:33:59 PM
I've been getting interested in the overlap of economics and security for awhile now, and I've seen several people recommend Shapiro and Varian's _Information Rules_ as an economic look at the IT industry.
Doing such a discussion will push me to read this soon, rather than "one of these days," so this is pretty self-interested. But I've heard several competent security people sing this book's praises, and would love to see how it's received by a bunch of economists.
Posted by: albatross at Sep 12, 2007 1:34:17 PM
A lot of great ideas above (I shared the same initial reaction as "Phil at Sep 12, 2007 12:41:25 PM"). A lot has been covered, so I'll throw out a strange one:
Why not ground a few "modern" problems in simian proto-economics?
Posted by: odograph at Sep 12, 2007 1:34:56 PM
I've been getting interested in the overlap of economics and security for awhile now, and I've seen several people recommend Shapiro and Varian's _Information Rules_ as an economic look at the IT industry.
Doing such a discussion will push me to read this soon, rather than "one of these days," so this is pretty self-interested. But I've heard several competent security people sing this book's praises, and would love to see how it's received by a bunch of economists.
Posted by: albatross at Sep 12, 2007 1:35:27 PM
How about "Fooled by Randomness" or "The (Mis) Behavior of Markets: A Fractal View of Risk, Ruin & Reward?"
Posted by: baiano at Sep 12, 2007 1:38:06 PM
Seeing as states can pretty much decide to hold their primaries whenever they want, why haven't we reached an equilibrium where all states hold their primaries on the same day? I feel like this should have happened by now, if you assume state legislatures take an interest in having a say in who the next president will be.
Posted by: why different primary dates at Sep 12, 2007 1:40:52 PM
The really, really long run. Get in touch with your inner sci-fi novelist. What does economic theory suggest that the global economy will look like in, say, 500 years.
Some suggestions:
1. A world without low cost producers.
2. A world in which some 20th and 21st century endowment funds and philantropic foundations have become some of the biggest players in the economy, due to having had prescribed donation rates far below the return on investmemts, for centuries.
3. A world in which the difference between office clothing and athletic clothing has been eroded because people work better when they are comfortable.
Those are my ideas. I expect yours will be far better...
Posted by: Johan Almenberg at Sep 12, 2007 1:41:15 PM
I would like to see a defense of economics in general. I see economic come under attach a lot, for holding unrealistic assumptions, and being an inaccurate measure of human action. So, I'd like to see what the economists response is.
Posted by: Chris at Sep 12, 2007 1:44:32 PM
Biofuels: overhype or the answer?
Posted by: Rue Des Quatre Vents at Sep 12, 2007 2:04:14 PM
I always wonder what smart economists (especially those whose research is not on finance) do with their personal finances.
Posted by: dsVasques at Sep 12, 2007 2:10:21 PM
I would love to hear about your current research, or your thoughts on advanced economic theory, rather than empirical studies. You are also writing a textbook, what do you include and what do you exclude and why? What are your thoughts on textbook economics, with specific examples? Why will be unique bout your textbook?
I would also like to read your thoughts on methodology.
Posted by: Carl Marks at Sep 12, 2007 2:13:15 PM
To Liberty:
My text might have been unclear- When I said "give them money" I meant that the employer would give more money via an increased minimum wage- I did not mean to imply government money/socialism.
Posted by: Conrad Barski at Sep 12, 2007 2:14:53 PM
Grad school, how to use the best of scholarship (not just economics) to enrich your life (scholarship in the sense of scholarly attitudes, not actual research)
Posted by: Booka at Sep 12, 2007 2:25:34 PM
Comrade Barski,
I don't want to take the thread off topic, but the two concepts (government subsidies and government mandated prices) have a lot in common.
In either case the only reason to imagine it being so simple is if you ignore scarcity. Firms don't have endless resources either, so being forced to pay more for low-skilled workers means cutting back elsewhere.
Posted by: liberty at Sep 12, 2007 2:26:38 PM
To Liberty: (Sorry, off topic again)
I agree with your argument completely- But to imply it's a zero sum game in this argument may actually make it even worse, I think... "We don't mind if the resources for a wage increase have to come out of the Walmart CEO's paycheck" would be the built-in reply.
My argument is, you can build this long chain of simple steps that defends why a minimum wage increase will work. The more-correct argument has to argue that it's a *negative* sum game, I would think: "everyone in the economy will hurt from minimum wage increases". Unfortunately, this argument is an order of magnitude more complicated to explain/substantiate (even if true) than just handing out extra $$ through a minimum wage increase and people are tempted to say "maybe it's more _pragmatic_ just to give more money."
Posted by: Conrad Barski at Sep 12, 2007 2:54:18 PM
Analyses on international trade, exchange rates, china, the Anglosphere, colonialism, the British Empire and its institutions.
Any observations about anti-americanism, culture, clash of civilizations, the rise and decline of the West, the war on terror, foreign policy.
Military analysis, a comparison of civil law and common law, ideas for an optimal law system.
Also, a practical discussion of how the market actually works, i.e. an explanation, including the effects of money, creative destruction, innovation, patents etc. why free enterprise is able to upgrade the world the best and why knee-jerk socialism is very wrong. Might be useful in discussions :)
Posted by: ralph ruben at Sep 12, 2007 3:30:12 PM
9/11 Truth....the most important topic of all time.
Posted by: kid mercury at Sep 12, 2007 3:40:47 PM
I'd like to see something on the economics of space travel, the economics of innovation, the role of mathematics in modern economics (too much? too little?), maybe some Austrian themed fun, maybe some public choice work on the differences in types of democracies, and of course, neuroeconomics!!
OH: how about a series on the economics of BYzantium?!
Posted by: Admiral at Sep 12, 2007 3:45:33 PM
How about navel-gazing--what sort of techniques work for spreading economic ideas--whether in the classroom or outside. You've used innovative ideas to spread your ideas/sell your books. I follow DeLong, Mankiw, and Freakonomics blogs, each of which has a different personality, goals, and techniques (and approaches to involving their readers). How does that relate to economics as a profession?
Posted by: Bill Harshaw at Sep 12, 2007 4:11:22 PM
Is the internet making the economy behave more like the economist perfectly competitive model?
Posted by: spencer at Sep 12, 2007 4:14:46 PM
I would like the minimum wage discussion also because the data just does not support the standard theory.
I suspect that the alternative theory might work through the mechanism of higher wages leading to greater capital per worker that raises living standards and output.
Posted by: spencer at Sep 12, 2007 4:17:42 PM
I'd like some thoughts on expanding the economy off planet.
Posted by: Walt at Sep 12, 2007 4:35:59 PM
Philip Bobbitt's 'The Shield of Achilles'
Posted by: Phil at Sep 12, 2007 4:43:15 PM
Healthcare economics. Possibly comparisons of different philosophies and the assumptions and the prognoses?
Posted by: Shefaly at Sep 12, 2007 4:53:39 PM
Why are some countries poorer than others?
Posted by: LemmusLemmus at Sep 12, 2007 4:56:31 PM
Why is the market for marijuana (at the bottom of the distribution ladder, at least) so different from what we would expect in an efficient market?
I don't smoke pot, but I have friends who do. From all the anecdotal evidence I have gathered, prices are very sticky. In times of low supply, the price doesn't move, dealers just sell out. Unless one is buying high quality product by request, price seems not to vary with the quality of the product. Inflation does not seem to have an impact either, as over the past 10 years, the price in my area has not changed at all.
An economic analysis of this market would prove to be quite interesting.
Posted by: tabak at Sep 12, 2007 5:05:44 PM
anything from Uncle Milton or the classics such as"The Logic of Collective Action","Exit,Voice, and Loyalty".
Modern applications for Game Theory
Posted by: J. Maxwell at Sep 12, 2007 5:05:53 PM
How about a deep discussion/book forum on the effects of land redistribution in LatAm (especially in countries with semi-feudal rural economies such as Brazil, Boliva, Guatemala, Ecuador...)? Especifically the efects on employment, wages, output (redistributing "iddle" lands ala "Decreto 900" in Guatemala 1952), inequality and indirect socio-political effects.
Or what about the effects of multicultural or multiethnic calss division on social and poitical stability, and its feedback on economic effects?
Thanks,
Economister
Posted by: economister at Sep 12, 2007 5:19:55 PM
Why does the U.S. have more lawyers per capita than any other country and is that a net positive or negative?
Posted by: joe at Sep 12, 2007 5:23:47 PM
I would like to see you engage with the work of my favourite English public intellectual - Ronald Hutton - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Hutton.
Since Hutton is a prolific writer, this could be a long term venture.
Hutton (currently a Professor of history at Britol University) writes about folklore, rituals, national myths, pagan religions (eg. witchcraft, druidry) and shamanism - as well as more conventional historical subjects such as the seventeenth century in England.
Posted by: Bruce G Charlton at Sep 12, 2007 5:29:42 PM
Tyler,
If you woke up one morning and said to yourself, "You know what my problem is? My damn discount rate is too high." What would you do, if anything, to lower it?
Posted by: Mark Broski at Sep 12, 2007 5:30:27 PM
I'd like to see discussion of this question:
How can economists explain (and model) society's irrational treatment of children?
The NPV of the average adult must exceed that of the average child. With the adult, we have a known quantity; for the child, there is risk that the child will turn out badly (or better) or even die, and there's also the cost of feeding and educating that child, and waiting for the investment to start to pay off.
Why then do we pervasively commit to policies that start off "if it saves even one child..."? I can understand why, for evolutionary reasons, a given parent would take this position for his or her child. But it doesn't make sense on a societal scale, as far as I can see.
And if I'm not sounding cold enough already... Even more so, when we're talking about specific cases rather than average. Why do we pay as much for a single year of education for a child that is unlikely to repay the investment as we do for the entire K-12 education of an average child?
Why are people likely angry at me even for asking this question?
Posted by: CWuestefeld at Sep 12, 2007 5:34:41 PM
Steven Pinker - Stuff of thought
Posted by: Jack sparrow at Sep 12, 2007 5:47:49 PM
I'd like to hear your thoughts on virtue ethics.
Posted by: Chris at Sep 12, 2007 5:56:29 PM
Why is the government poised to bail out wealthy people who lent risky mortgages and to support real estate prices?
Why do people on the Internet think those of us who are upset by this are somehow being immature.
Posted by: Mike Jenkins at Sep 12, 2007 6:15:03 PM
I'd like to read and discuss more about government distortion of markets: ethanol requirements, sugar subsidies, price gouging laws, minimum wage laws, smart growth, antitrust, "fair trade" legislation. I know this has all been covered. But it's just so damned important that I want to keep the discussion going.
Posted by: John Dewey at Sep 12, 2007 6:49:09 PM
In Tyler's first podcast on econtalk with Russ Roberts, he discussed his desire to write a macroeconomics book that is accessible to the masses. As he said at the time, no book currently exists. There are plenty of macro-oriented blogs, but little cohesive structure to them. I would enjoy seeing MR experiment with some of the ideas that would be included in such a book. Many, though not all, ideas in DYIE first appeared on MR. Why can't the same be done for the macro book? As I'm sure many loyal MR readers would benefit from clear, accessible lessons on macro, I believe that a series on macro for the lay person would be of infinite value.
Posted by: Niall at Sep 12, 2007 6:52:11 PM
Just once I'd like to read a post about cats.
Posted by: Kent at Sep 12, 2007 6:58:13 PM
The isea about presidential candidates' economic positions is good, but focus on the unintended consequences. they tend to be the downfall of many superficially attractive proposals.
The book "The Victory of Reason" could lead to a very spirited discussion.
People seem unable to break away from thinking that the world is a zero-sum game. How can we, the economic cognoscenti, correct this?
Posted by: Doug Coyne at Sep 12, 2007 6:58:24 PM
For entirely selfish reasons: a post about traveling to Mexico City
Posted by: Michael at Sep 12, 2007 7:09:32 PM
i'd like to see a classic covered. like capitalism and freedom or general theory
Posted by: at Sep 12, 2007 7:57:11 PM
Could we have "My favo[u]rite things London", perhaps?
You'd have to decide for yourselves whether to exclude writers who moved to the capital but didn't start out as Londoners (that's Shakespeare gone, for starters).
Alternately, your top hits in England would be great. I think you've only done Scotland when it comes to the UK.
Posted by: Gabriel at Sep 12, 2007 8:17:08 PM
inflation in tipping.
Posted by: pnj at Sep 12, 2007 8:20:57 PM
How do you cope with the crushing weight of the absurdity of existence?
Posted by: Anonymous at Sep 12, 2007 8:24:26 PM
Is there a book that explains "weak monotonicity"? I didn't think there could be degrees of monotonicity. ;-)
Posted by: dan cole at Sep 12, 2007 9:15:45 PM
i would like to see economics and education...if education is a monopoly market, that might explain all of the dead weight losses, but there's a lot more
Posted by: Mike Fladlien at Sep 12, 2007 9:29:05 PM
Philanthropy is hot now, as a major economic re-assessment of it as a concept is underway--Profit/nonprofit, redefining public vs. private roles, etc.
But the real meat of the matter is the intersection of economics and socail psychology, esp. self-motivation and persuasion. How IS value created out of almost nothing, that is, social mores, tastes, fads, and perceptions?
Posted by: TD at Sep 12, 2007 9:45:43 PM
More Roberto Bolano.
Posted by: Tyrone Slothrop at Sep 12, 2007 10:19:37 PM
I'd like a discussion of challenges and career choices faced by a subset of professional entertainers... call it "rock-'n-roll game theory":
1) How can a band best maintain unit cohesion through the difficult phase of initial product development and brand building during which the musicians establish a style, build up a songlist, secure gigs with increasing ease, regularity, and positive feedback, and wrangle their first recording contract [or offer]? One complication: band members are rarely equal in their talent, commitment, level of responsibility (or sobriety, for that matter), or [realistic] expection of long-term rewards. If a band is obviously led by a songwriting frontman who anticipates reaping additional monetary rewards down the line (in the form of songwriting royalties, not to mention greater rewards and opportunities accruing from his/her greater degree of fame as the singer/leader/resident musical genius), how does that person sufficiently incentivize the less-productive members, especially during the lean years when everyone is keeping the proverbial "day job"? Many bands adopt a simple communitarian divvying of the early-phase revenues, with every member receiving an equal share (even if it's only a $10 per diem) in their early days, since the band's success depends on its members sharing a threshold level of commitment. (If the frontman hogs the meager gate receipts from the early gigs, he may feel confident about quitting his day job and committing to music and touring full time, but his bandmates probably won't.) But even a communitarian ethos will likely face a growing inequality in the spoils with growing fame and fortune, especially as songwriting royalties become a factor. Should such a transition in the compensation scheme be anticipated by the band from its earliest days? Should a manager or frontman introduce this possibility to blunt its impact and the resultant increase in band tensions (which often lead bands to break up just as they're enjoying their first real taste of success)? Can less-vital band members be incentivized in a non-monetary way with, say, a more communal and equalitarian band ethos or brand, as opposed to supporting an attention-hogging frontman? And in what ways, and to what extent, does the number of bandmembers (and perhaps more to the point, the ratio of non-songwriters to songwriters) impact these decisions?
2) Speaking of compensation schemes, what is the fairest way to divvy up proceeds? Is it the same thing as the most efficacious way, that is, to promote the long-term viability of the band as an ongoing brand? Case ex.: Talking Heads adopted [invented?] a protocol in which each member secretly voted what he/she considered the fair share for every other member, as no one was allowed to vote for their own share. (For the balloting to remain truly anonymous, a fifth party, such as a manager or trusted friend, would have to have collated the results.) The result was that the songwriter and frontman David Byrne presumably earned a larger share than the others, exclusive of his songwriter's royalties, although they never revealed the results of their balloting to the public! Nevertheless, since this system was kept by the band for some time (and possibly for the duration of the band as a recording entity), it's probably fair to say that each member felt their system was more of less an accurate reflection of their individual contributions to the band and thus "fair," even if not equalitarian. Could this method be improved upon? How might it fail -- either individuals or the band as a whole? Could it be relied upon to yield optimal results in bands where two or more members shared an extra-band allegiance to each other (i.e., romantic entanglement, familial bonds, or some other form of kinship), provided that even those members shared the understanding that their best interests were served by the band staying together?
3) The pros and cons of breaking up a band in order to replace members, scale down to a smaller unit, go solo, and/or go indie. There's a host of economic and personal considerations at work -- the willingness to assume risk; maintaining creativity and productivity and one's psychological equilibrium without the band; working with a small label or none at all (even forming one's own label and going the direct-marketing route via the Internet); and the revenue breakdowns of earning a smaller share of a presumably bigger (and well-branded) pie, vs. keeping whatever you make in a new, obscure band or solo identity. Doubtless there's a slew of additional considerations and problems to consider in this and the above problems...
Whew! I hope somebody finds this subject tempting enough to discuss. Thanks in advance for any response!
Posted by: Scriv at Sep 12, 2007 11:03:18 PM
I'd like to hear some discussion about the dynamics of political polarization. My hypothesis is that improved information flow has led to enhanced self-selection, forcing any arbitrary group to expel any member that deviates even slightly from group orthodoxy.
Posted by: TheRadicalModerate at Sep 13, 2007 12:26:05 AM
A few days ago you posted on how many books to start. "So few other people sample books en masse, yet the practice strikes me as trivially correct."
Would you offer the same advice on consuming music?
Posted by: dhalsim at Sep 13, 2007 1:01:59 AM
Why are the prices so high at Matias Dahlgrens new restaurant in the Grand Hotel in Stockholm? Potential candidates are:
1 Costs (ingredients, staff, rent) are high.
2 Demand is inelastic (50% of guests are wealthy americans).
3 Market power (ther are too few players in the segment of super luxuray fine dining in Stockholm).
Posted by: Divine at Sep 13, 2007 2:04:22 AM
Something on Creativity. What is to be "creative"? What is a "creative" idea? Can we really say that some people are more creative than others? Or is it just our way of summarizing many other hard-to-define skills?
Posted by: londenio at Sep 13, 2007 4:01:34 AM
Here's one that's unrelated to Economics, but appropriate given the fact that this is a blog and the way in which your book club was conducted--Writing to Learn, by William Zinsser.
Posted by: Adam at Sep 13, 2007 6:11:57 AM
"is there a book that explains "weak monotonicity"?"
Any introductory calculus book?
Anyway, it means that more requests for a certain topic won't lower the chance that it is selected.(Nitpick: of course it hasn't been said that the function isn't weakly decreasing but I
think that is an unlikely case.)
With weak monotonicity more requests will mean the chance stays the same or increases. With strong monotonicity more requests would mean that the chance can't stay the same but has to increase.
Posted by: Johan Richter at Sep 13, 2007 6:16:52 AM
The relevance of computational game theory for economics? What does it mean for the applications of economic theory that computing the Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete?
Posted by: Johan Richter at Sep 13, 2007 6:23:39 AM
The relevance of computational game theory for economics? What does it mean for the applications of economic theory that computing the Nash equilibrium is PPAD-complete?
Posted by: Johan Richter at Sep 13, 2007 6:24:16 AM
What's the economics every person should know when graduating from school?
What can economics tell us about how to get rid of an addiction?
Posted by: LemmusLemmus at Sep 13, 2007 6:48:24 AM
The strengths and weaknesses of the normative and behavioral assumptions underlying economic choice theory.
What do economists tend to get right, what do they tend to miss or get wrong?
Posted by: aaron_m at Sep 13, 2007 7:05:27 AM
Tyler, could you please ask Alex to post his request for requests, too?
Economic history topics will always be greatly appreciated.
Posted by: J at Sep 13, 2007 7:48:30 AM
Healthcare economics is of vital interest to me.
Also, discussion of economic systems that may be sustainable in the long run, keeping in mind what some regard as real limits to growth-- a globe on which resources are finite. The current operative model seems to be based on 2-3% annual growth in gross world product projected indefinitely, and seems logically unsustainable. Thoughtful rebuttal of the limits to growth view would be welcome, too.
Posted by: Johns at Sep 13, 2007 9:21:17 AM
I would like to suggest William Baumol's recent book "Good Capitalism, Bad Capitalism". It raises a number of the issues in Farewell to Alms in a most thought provoking way.
Posted by: Paul H at Sep 13, 2007 10:31:40 AM
Requested topics:
1. Cleaning up "total regulatory messes" with sensible economic thought, in areas such as:
a. Health care economics
b. Optimal regulation of public utilities (electric, etc.)
c. Taxation?
d. Urban planning
e. Farm policy
Basically, what policy areas contain the biggest and worst deviations from sensible economic thought. How should we fix it?
2. Related: what could we privatize?
More specific questions:
1. I'd like to hear you weigh in on Marty Weitzman's thought about the "thickened tail" of climate change disasters. I take him to say that subjective estimates of the "tail thickness" are what substantially drive the result of an economic model of climate impact. In other words, the whole enterprise seems to be endangered by subjectivity. What's your take?
2. I'm fascinated by the "finance" angle of looking at climate change risk (again I got this from Weitzman). Even a primer on this would be great.
3. Why aren't most people using CFL's (compact fluorescents) already, given that they already cost less than incandescents over their lifetime? Market-based intervention like a carbon tax supposedly gives people the right incentives to make the right decision. But some of us look at this situation and say "the incentives for CFL's are there, but people are seemingly making the wrong decision." Do we trust that people are making a sound decision (as free-market economists like to do) or do we interpret this as some sort of malfunction and try to get people over the "hump" with some sort of regulatory prod?
4. Arcane request: How is behavioral economics affecting all sorts of areas of thought?
- climate change
- health care
- equity arguments in general
Thanks!! Anything you blog about will be great.
Posted by: mk at Sep 13, 2007 11:23:00 AM
Oh, another thing:
5. How is economic modeling being affected by psychology research?
Most economists would say that a regulation that mandates the use of, say, water-efficient shower-heads incurs a dead weight loss, apart from the cost to ensure compliance (let's ignore that cost for the moment). In this example I doubt the price would go up. But consumers might not get exactly what they would most want. But, I think psychology would say that people might grumble about this for a little while, but then they'd get used to it, and probably wouldn't even care past a certain point.
So the question is: do we really trust the simple model of the rational consumer? Probably not, right? So how does it change our view of the world to shift to a more accurate model of the consumer? Does it affect our willingness to use certain regulatory levers? Etc.
Posted by: mk at Sep 13, 2007 11:39:40 AM
More fiction reviews and suggestions.
Posted by: bob at Sep 13, 2007 12:04:53 PM
More fiction reviews and suggestions.
Posted by: bob at Sep 13, 2007 12:05:02 PM
Umm...
1. How do Economists invest their _personal_ fortunes?
2. Is there a positive correlation between democracy and a nation's wealth? A causal relation?
3. Economics of happiness. How does economics explain happiness (or lack of).
Posted by: Atul at Sep 13, 2007 3:31:17 PM
Happiness (aka Subjective Wellbeing) Research
The importance of relative consumption/status
Posted by: Michael Bishop at Sep 13, 2007 3:36:01 PM
Second choice: If existing texts are to be it, then an examination of the influences of the works of Max Weber on other works of major influence (economics in particular) in the following periods. After all J.M. Keynes was a Sociologist.
Posted by: R. Richard Schweitzer at Sep 13, 2007 9:31:51 PM
A post about Mexico's future would be nice? Is this country progressing? How much and how far?
Posted by: russ at Sep 14, 2007 10:22:43 AM
Re the Conrad Barski/Liberty discussion:
As one of these persons on the street, when I hear "economics" my reaction is "why don't ordinary people ever get to benefit from its precepts? Why do its policies always end up making the average person's life worse?" Maybe that's a political question instead of an economic question.
Posted by: Jay at Sep 14, 2007 4:37:55 PM
I am interested in what the end game for capitalism and free markets is.
if we assume:
1. all countries will eventually be politically and economically free
2. all countries will fully participate in the global economy.
3. technological progress will continue, but not exponentially indefinitely.
Then what will happen if (e.g.) we all get to the medium level of wealth in th US today?
Will services be too expensive (as domestic servants are for the middle class today vs. 1920)?
Will manufactured goods become luxury items (if made by hand as in current sweatshops) as the labour will be very expensive?
I'm sure you have other observations!
many thanks
Paul
p.s. will buy your book in paperback!
Posted by: Paul Ralley at Sep 14, 2007 4:41:34 PM
Please: The Age of Turbulence - Greenspan, released next monday
Posted by: mthomas at Sep 16, 2007 2:23:38 PM
I hope a late comment will still be considered:
I'm applying to medical schools and will soon be weighing factors such as in-state location, cost, prestigiousness, proximity to current residence, and size of city as I choose schools.
Cost is the only truly quantifiable variable. It matters a lot; schools claim that your need will be covered by financial aid, but one's parents' incomes are factored into it even if you're financially independent (up to age 30), so it ends up screwing you anyway. The debt is terrifying.
In short, aside from my personal city preferences, how much more should I pay/sacrifice to go to a prestigious school, or a far away one, etc?
Posted by: Rachel at Sep 18, 2007 5:22:10 PM
hi,I University majoring in the legal profession.After graduation,I 徵信 the work of the strong interest.Has worked in several徵信社.Has a wealth of experience. Now I immigrants France,Hope to continue to engage in the work of徵信 credit.
now,is to wake up every day to drink 咖啡, shopping. I hope that early awareness of Boles.
thanks,thank very much.
Posted by: Bob at Mar 13, 2008 10:37:39 PM
