Unemployment rates, Shiller on housing, urban data, and soccer.

The FRB Cleveland again, this time telling us about alternative unemployment rates.

Shiller, of the Case-Shiller housing index, tells us about the housing market. Seems like people are more rosy now about their long term investment prospects.

Matthew Kahn talks about possibilities with urban data. If we could look at power bills, we could determine whether people have high-power consumption items, of if they're just being wasteful. I'm sure there might be a number of interesting uses of the data, if privacy issues could be resolved.

The economics of soccer. How do I get to do that?

Cap and trade, data, open journals, and more econblogs.

Krugman explains the basics of cap-and-trade.

Here's a handy little tool from IBM to facilitate data visualization. Looks neat!

And, if you didn't know about this before, but there's an open-access Economics journal. There look to be some really neat articles in there.

In the same vein, here's an econblog aggregator to keep up with research and academic blogs. Thanks to RePEc.

Google,, unemployment and stocks, wages, and an interactive map

Google has more data to easily peruse through! Mmm, data...

Unemployment is up, but apparently the stock markets like it. 9.7%... after two months almost flat. Who knows where this is going? Will it hit 10%? Still, this is better than the 13% projected earlier in the year by some.

Average hourly wages are up again. Mind you that the unemployment rate for people with less education is higher than for people with more education. Also, retail isn't doing well, still. Lower wage people just can't find work, while experienced workers are being held on to.

Here's a neat interactive map showing foreclosure rates, unemployment rates, and household income. Data's good, but it's even better when it's easy to look through.

High School Performance, Newspapers

Mark Perry shows that high school GPAs are rising while SAT scores are falling. I think that this indicates two competing objectives. High schools want their students to have high GPAs so they can go to good colleges--which gives prestige. SAT scores are falling because they (College Board?) wants to be able to claim to have a difficult test, most capable of determining the quality of students. I wouldn't be surprised if high school students were more objectively performing about the same they always do.

Professor Becker thinks through the newspaper industry. I like the idea of newspapers being structured not unlike the BBC, if the market would otherwise not support private journalistic efforts. I think it's a pretty important service to society. Although, I think Becker underestimates the potential power of internet advertising. Google has made tons of money off of it, and newspaper companies may need a similar sort of revenue generating revolution. News sites may also become sources of analysis of news from experts, rather than just the source of the facts.

Krugman's history, South Africa, rational markets, HDMI cable, and crime trackers

Also from Newmark's Door, Krugman gets history wrong. Both people on the left and the right disagree with him, though I think that's kind of an empty statement.

Relatively good news for HIV/AIDS in South Africa. The infection rate has leveled off, with reductions in certain age groups. Still, South Africa has 5.5 million HIV-positive people.

Justin Fox gives a quick summary of the history of rational markets in the last 80 years, which is also a summary of his books.

Ezra Klein and Tyler Cowen seem to think that some traditional brick-and-mortar stores are not lowering their prices in their competitive markets. HDMI cable seems to be very expensive in stores, but online is available for next to nothing. Klein further comments that online shopping is a wealth transfer from those not comfortable with online shopping to those who are comfortable with online shopping. It seems to me that those comfortable with online shopping are in larger, more competitive markets. Brick-and-mortar stores cater to a different demographic than online stores. Moreover, I think that particularly in the case of 80% and 90+% discounts, online stores sell excess stock or used stock, rather than stock just recently received from a manufacturer. I admit these are conjectures, though.

ThinkMarkets provides some links to crime tracking websites, and neighborhood information websites.

CPI, developing nations, marriage, and Wolfram Alpha

Matt Nolan tells us not to confuse CPI growth with inflation. CPI is a bad indicator of the magnitude of inflation--besides, they measure different things.

Here's a vox article on trade advice for developing nations during a recession. Avoid protectionist policies. Um, I think they need more help than that.

Spendthrifts tend to marry tightwads, which contributes to marital conflict. Does this mean that, on average, couples make pretty good savings decisions? And, with less variance than single people?

Wolfram Alpha provides a new way to search for information. This looks like a really neat system, actually. It gets released this month, so check back to see it in action!

History, open data, auto industry, financial planning, bachelor's degrees, and gas prices

A new blog on economic history.

Hey, world bankers like open data too! Those are great guys.

Speaking of which, Hal Varian used Google Trends to make better forecasts.

James Hamilton is still on the case, reporting about the declining auto industry.

ESPlanner, a long term financial planning website, though the site isn't always working.

Some community colleges offer bachelor's degrees. I like that degrees are becoming less expensive, but they shouldn't be easier to get. This is the classic Spence problem.

Mark Perry gives us a look at real gas prices. It looks like a falling trend since 1919, with some big spikes thrown in. And, note that the spikes take us to about back to the 1919 level anyways.

Agriculture, Libertarianism, TED talk, law, city house prices, and Google

Some stylized facts about agricultural subsidies. It looks like a very inefficient market. Again, no surprise there.

Henry Kaufman explains how Libertarianism hindered the Fed. While I don't agree with all of it, it raises some good points, I think.

A couple of very interesting pieces from Marginal Revolution. I recommend you read them. Alex Tabarrok gave a TED talk, and Tyler Cowen discusses the field of Law and Economics.

Here's some Case-Shiller city data on housing prices. They're still dropping, though it looks like we're nearing normal levels in some places. Unfortunately, there's still likely more dropping to happen, due to a super saturated market.

On a different sort of note, now Google offers some searchable public data. I hope they greatly expand this.

Chile, debates, housing, oil and recessions, and cognitive skills

Rodrik talks about the Chilean Minister of Finance. He saved during the boom, although it was unpopular, and is now spending the massive savings. Why don't more countries do this?

Alex Tabarrok talks about the debates at Intelligence Squared. I like the concept of the website, though. Get experts to debate issues and provide podcasts. People vote on winners.

Jon Lansner talks about housing, via CR. Prices should bottom out late next year.

James Hamilton points out the connection between oil price spikes and recessions. That's really interesting research.

Some research shows that people with higher cognitive skills perform better economically. Moreover, to the extent that this is a genetic trait, evolution may play a factor in separating people with of cognitive skill levels.

Newspapers, teaching, multilateralism, data, and the Geithner plan

There has been a bill introduced to allow newspapers file as nonprofit organizations. You know public television? Public radio? Try public newspapers. The Tax Foundation says that this may mean the end of editorials, but I don't see that happening. Public television and radio often have commentaries by people that express their opinions, so editorials may take a different form.

A community college professor gives some thoughts on teaching basic economics. Her article is well worth the read, I think. When I try to explain the concepts they're supposed to be learning, I worry that the students are sometimes missing the point, so I think this might be a good way to try to drive the essentials home.

FT provides an article on the importance of economic and political multilateralism. I think most economists see things this way as well, which makes me wonder about the economic education of political "realists."

Mark Thoma tells us that economists need better (and faster) economic data. if people expect us to have better forecasts. I suppose it makes sense to have better data as technology gets better, right? In a somewhat related post, Steve Horwitz points out that importance of looking at the right data.

And, a NYT debate on the Geithner plan. Follow along to see thoughts by Brad DeLong, Simon Johnson, Paul Krugman, and Mark Thoma. It's certainly an interesting read.

Transparency versus clarity

Free Exchange challenges the idea that more transparency is needed from financial institutions. It is argued that the information is out there, it's just really hard to understand.

The trick is to disclose information in a manner that enhances understanding rather than clouds it. But with complex securities this is easier said than done. Meanwhile, an insistence on simple securities necessarily discourages innovation and more efficient risk allocation, resulting in less capital available to firms, and ultimately lower rates of economic growth.

The point is also brought up that consumers don't make good decisions even if they have the information and understand it.

In my opinion, clarity is part of transparency--if you have 500 pages of text to explain what a product is, the message is effectively hidden. Still, an idea popped up for me. How many people understand physiology or the science behind nutrition? I'd be willing to be the number is significantly less than the portion of people that can read a nutrition guide on the side of a food product at the grocery store.

Sure, it doesn't mean people always make healthy choices, and those labels vary in usefulness to each consumer, but they're supposedly a fairly decent guideline for the average consumer. Not everyone needs the same amount of calories per day or vitamin A per day, but it gives consumers a rough idea of the nutritional value of the products they're buying, for those who care. The point is that knowledge of biology, chemistry, or nutrition isn't a necessary condition to understand those nutrition guides.

I wonder if it's possible to make such a label for the financial industry. I would initially imagine that such a label would be either too complicated to understand or too simplified to be useful, but maybe there's a happy middle ground someplace.

Moving onwards.

I've created a page on my website that includes links to some of the best commentary about the financial crisis around. With so much opinions on the matter, it's difficult to keep up with it all, difficult to figure out what's useful, and it kind of crowds out other interesting pieces of information. I'll keep that page updated with information or links to information, and try to keep this blog for other stuff (though, chances are there will be interesting financial crisis news I'll want to mention on here as well).

Robert Waldmann, on the Angry Bear, refutes the claims of the previously mentioned physicist. While Waldmann brings up good points, I don't think he refutes all of the claims with satisfaction. In a similar vein, a University of Houston physicist writes "What Economists should learn from Econophysics."

Now for a few links from Dani Rodrik. He's a Harvard professor specializing in developmental issues. He points to a useful site for development data. But, he's sometimes silly, such as linking this economics rap (I'm kind of impressed). He also sometimes takes on fellow Harvard professor Greg Mankiw. He also has a number of posts pointing out that subsidies can lower prices, not raise them (depending on whether the country is a net importer or a net exporter). MyC4 looks like a Kiva-type site. That's good stuff. And, a ranking of econoblogs, updated with data from the past 90 days. The other common ranking I knew of is here.

Here is a video archive of London School of Economics lectures. Nice stuff. I'll eventually make a webpage with economics podcasts and videos.

Phil Izzo at the Wall Street Journal tells us that most lawmakers don't have economic educations. Well, I think we all knew that already, but it's particularly pertinent when they're trying to fix a financial crisis.

It's interesting to note the net present value of a JD. I wish I could also find the study that shows the incidence of JDs in various countries.

I Bits is an interesting blog, and Laura Holson tells us that wireless broadband boosts economies.

Lastly, a couple of Slate articles I meant to post on here a long time ago. A discussion about automobile subsidies, and a commentary on Obama's law exams he used to give.

Enjoy!

Some recommended articles, not just about the financial crisis.

I'm not very familiar with Capital Chronicle, but they have an interesting article of some compiled for and against arguments of the original Paulson Plan. Though it failed, I think it's important to know why everyone wasn't gung ho about it.

While it didn't make huge news, the Fed pumped $630 billion dollars into the economy. Let's hope that has a positive effect and that it doesn't end up hurting the Fed.

A physicist makes the case for new models of economics, such as computer modeling as opposed to mathematical modeling.

You think you pay a lot in taxes? In the United States, taxes rates used to get above 90% for a pretty long time. Those weren't necessarily bad times, either.

Political Calculations points out that stocks are still doing okay--there hasn't been a collapse. We're not in panic mode, despite some pretty strong setbacks.

A look at price increases in New York City over the past 40 years. It seems quite interesting, at least. Prices for food went up less than I expected.

Professor Hal Varian makes the case that piracy doesn't kill an economy, it just requires different business models. Rather, he made the case four years ago but more people still need to know.

Dean Baker points out that the stock market is not the economy. A lot of people have been freaking out about stocks lately.

UPDATE: I have a bunch of these things, so there'll probably be more updates to this thread.

Steve Sailer tells why minority lending didn't contribute to this mess (I've heard people say such government regulations and pressure are the original source). He also provides some interesting background information.

And, another compilation of blurbs from pundits.

At Marginal Revolution, they have a lot of interesting commentary. These from Tyler Cowen: Best and Worse Case Scenarios, his summary on the crisis, he points out that the FDIC coming into the picture is a brilliant idea (one that should've been thought of earlier, maybe), and he's my original source of the minority lending issue. Oh, and he also points to a new blog by Chicago economist Casey Mulligan, with some interesting but wordy commentary. He could use some better formatting too.

Some side thoughts.

Professor Brad DeLong asks why universities still have large lectures. My contribution: professors don't feel textbooks do an adequate enough job of explaining material. This is partly due to limited space in textbooks, which are a function of production costs. Authors have to find a balance between precision and clarity in the span of 800 pages. However, online textbooks don't have this restriction. An online textbook could be written to be very clear, with hyperlinks to rigorous mathematical proofs, or somesuch. Paradigms change slowly, though.

Bianaoh points me to the Dataverse Network, which seeks to make data and its analysis more accessible, while preserving credit. It strikes me as a great idea, and I hope to be able to use such tools in the future.

Cartoonist Scott Adams tells people what economists are good for. Convincing the public of anything unpopular is an uphill battle, Scott.

Lastly, something more related to the current economy. Current numbers with an historical perspective. The message: things have been worse, and we're still around. Cheer up, people.

National and International Governments

According to a Reuters article:

McCain's top economic advisers said Obama's proposals would hurt small businesses and not foster job growth. Martin Feldstein, a Harvard professor of economics, said Obama's approach would backfire.

"Obama's plan will slow the economy, will depress the economy by raising taxes -- raising taxes on business investment, raising taxes on individuals. And that tax increase isn't going to happen immediately, but the fact that he promises that he will make that happen in 2010 or 2011 is enough to continue to depress the economy now," he said.

Now, Martin Feldstein is a smart guy, but I don't agree with him here. Given the fiscal lag, the relative lack of power a president has over the economy, and the fact that congress will alter any bill proposed, it'll be a long time before anything similar anyone's currently proposed economic plan will have an effect on the economy. Moreover, the Federal Reserve Board governors are betting on upside risks being greater than downside risks--so we may actually want a slow down of the economy when any kind of plan does eventually hit, in order to stave off inflationary pressures. Moreover, the results of the Obama plan may be mixed, as middle class consumers will supposedly be getting help (and thusly be buying more things, helping all companies).

This is a great idea that should've been done a long time ago. I saw it linked on some other site, but I don't remember which.

http://www.showusabetterway.com/

In UK, you can get money if you come up with a way to improve the lives of UKers with online applications or providing easy access to data. They "want to hear your ideas on how to reuse, represent, mashup or combine the information the government holds to make it useful."

Police and Privacy

This is a good op/ed piece in the Houston Chronicle about better neighborhoods having better police enforcement.

Under a truly free market system, all policing would be handled by private entities, and the poor would suffer from little to no policing. Indeed, there used to be private militias. I think most Americans agree, though, that safety should be universal, and police forces should equally protect everyone. There are certainly economic arguments to be made to this effect as well, particularly concerning the necessity of private property. If wealthier areas would like more or better police enforcement, maybe they could push for higher taxes to pay for better police wages or more officers for all. That's essentially what we do with national security, isn't it?

EDIT: Another article about the lack of police officers and how it affects other parts of an economy.

An article in PC Mag about the anonymity (or lack thereof) of internet activity.

Of course, this is an issue outside the realm of PC Mag, as people are afraid of losing their privacy. Allow me to play the devil's advocate: what are people trying to hide? In an age of the freedom of information, we learn that a more informed citizen is a more powerful citizen (and, you can substitute "citizen" for "consumer" or any other type of person). What are people doing that will harm them if their secret is revealed?

Let us assume a world in which we have no (or minimal) privacy. Let's call this a Free Information World. Everyone would have access to your phone number, your address, your name, your current location, what television shows you like, and so on. You wouldn't be afraid of stalkers. Why is that? Everyone would be able to identify a stalker pretty easily. If your current location was always known, the resident of a house would know when you were at his window. Stalking would be much more difficult. Criminal activity in general would be more difficult--which means that there would be fewer criminals, and less to be afraid of. This, of course, requires world-wide freedom of information. The system would work if it was limited to a country only if immigrants and foreign visitors were also tracked.

This Free Information World possess some practical problems with money. We wouldn't want people to be able to access your bank accounts, regardless of whether or not people knew how much money you had (it's not like you can be physically robbed, if your current location is known, and the source of "new" money is known, and so on). We'd need some high-tech DNA sampling identification system (or maybe just an ID card that stays around with you, assuming its current location is always known as well, in the event the card is lost or mistakenly picked up by someone else, or whatever).

But, your money, like all of your possessions, could be considered a private property issue in the sense that everything you own must be protected, and inaccessible by others unless you give it to them (blackmail is also more difficult, and naughty secrets are harder to keep in this world). As long as these private property issues can be resolved, this world should be a functioning society.

The only other issue I can possibly imagine is prejudice. If people know your medical history, they may be less likely to want a long-lasting relationship with you. If they know your financial history, they may be less inclined to spend time with someone outside of his socioeconomic class. I answer: you would know ahead of time what people's prejudices were. Do you want to associate with a prejudiced person? Associating with someone is a mutual thing. Also, if you knew every one's problems, then you'd likely be more understanding with people in different situations. Sure, that person may have some issue you don't like, but are you so perfect? Everyone has their issues.

Regardless, this hypothetical world is also probably futuristic enough that maybe there'd be less prejudice in the world anyways. I can hope, right?