Marginal Revolution

Brazil facts of the day

1. Brazil has become a net creditor nation for the first time in its history.

2. About 15% of the Congress is under formal investigation for crimes, ranging from attempted homicide to money laundering.

3. Since 2005 more than 20 million people have entered "the middle class," defined as a monthly income of $635.  The percentage of middle-class Brazilians has grown from 34% to 46%.

Those facts are all from "Brazil Joins Front Rank of New Economic Powers," in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal.

Economicwoman.com

That is the site address for a new blog on feminism and economics.  Allison, the blogger, points us to a YouTube channel on feminist economics.

Here is Allison's advice for economics undergraduates; feel free to add to it in our comments section.

CSI on Trial

...to judge by the most comprehensive study on the reliability of forensic evidence to date, the error rate is more than 10% in five categories of analysis, including fiber, paint and body fluids. ...DNA and fingerprints are more reliable but still not foolproof....a 2005 study in the  Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology suggests a fingerprint false-positive rate a bit below 1%, a widely read 2006 experiment shows an alarming 4% false-positive rate.

How can we preserve the usefulness of forensic evidence while protecting the public when it breaks down? The core problem with the forensic system is monopoly. Once evidence goes to one lab, it is rarely examined by any other. That needs to change. Each jurisdiction should include several competing labs. ...

This procedure may seem like a waste. But such checks would save taxpayer money. Extra tests are inexpensive compared to the cost of error, including the cost of incarcerating the wrongfully convicted....

Other reforms should include making labs independent of law enforcement and a requirement for blind testing. When crime labs are part of the police department, some forensic experts make mistakes out of an unconscious desire to help their "clients," the police and prosecution. Independence and blind testing prevent that.

That's forensics expert Roger Koppl writing in Forbes.  If anything I think Koppl is being kind to CSI.  Take bullet lead analysis a procedure used by the FBI for decades that turns out to have no scientific validity whatsoever.

Full Disclosure: Koppl's op-ed is based on a paper in a book called Law Without Romance edited by Ed Lopez to be published by Independent Institute where I am director of research.

New assorted links

1. Boltzmann brains, via Brad DeLong and here

2. Rest and home court advantage, and here

3. My old colleague Charles Lave has passed away

4. The Antiplanner blog

5. Reminiscenses of Richard Rorty, via MY

6. New science fiction TV shows coming from J.J. Abrams and Joss Wheedon

The Pixar Touch

Steve Jobs had put some $50 million into the company.  It was still reliably losing money year after year.  Now he also faced the possibility of millions more in liability; although Disney had agreed to increase its lowball $17.5 million budget for Toy Story to $21.1 million, it still wasn't enough.  By 1994, costs were expected to run some $6 million higher.  Hence, Disney forced Pixarto obtain a $3 million credit line to cover its share of the overages -- backed, if necessary, by Job's personal guarantee.  Weary of watching Pixar's deficits pile up, Jobs had tried to sell all or part of the company many times...

That is from David A. Price's The Pixar Touch, an excellent book.  It is good most of all on all the false fits and starts behind a successful entrepreneurial venture.

David Brooks, in a nutshell?

Wunderkind Ben Casnocha summarizes a talk:

David Brooks, columnist, New York Times:

• "I'll be brief because many of you are academics, and you're not here to hear me talk, you're here to hear yourselves talk."
• He likes Edmund Burke.
• People learn when there's an emotional connection.
• All factions of conservative movement united around distrust of government - this ain't enough.
• Obama's perceptiveness / self-awareness / stability is striking.
• McCain's morality is based on honor, not morality. #1 trait is aloofness - somewhat detached personality.
• Conservatism shouldn't have permanent policies (like tax cuts): don't get moral about a situational policy issue.
• Conservatism is about not knowing much; modest about what we can know/do.
• Conservatism is philosophy first, policy second. Liberalism is policy first, philosophy later.
• Conservatism values social mobility more than equality.
• Top issues in the election: bipartisanship, immigration, healthcare.
• People aren't solely self-interested economic rational creatures. If this were the case, why would 30% of students drop out of high school even though it's econ ruinous to do so?
• What's the point of being a democrat if you can't play the class card?
• Bush seems 40 IQ points smarter in private than in public.

Here's a QuickTime version of Brooks' speech.

I agree with many of these, although I am not sure that conservatism puts philosophy first.  Does it not put experience first?  Also, I think the main issue in the election is George W. Bush.