Trains, raising taxes, popping bubbles, and oil

Ed Glaeser doesn't like the high-speed train idea. We should focus on high-density areas, he says. What about focusing on major airline routes? Houston may not be particulary dense (though, we're getting our own rail system, eventually) but having a train option to get to Chicago or Boston relatively quickly would be a boon. Ryan Avent has more criticisms of Glaeser.

David Leonhardt talks about Club Wagner--to recognize that we need to raise taxes in a wealthy society.

Kevin Drum agrees with NY Fed Chairman William Dudley when he says that the Fed should take a more active role in recognizing and popping bubbles.

I always find it interesting when people try to make predictions about the future price of oil. One analysts thinks it'll go down to $55 soon, and hover there as a summertime low.

Healthcare, financial crisis, stimulus, and jobs.

Instead of the UK and Canada, Jonathan Cohn compares our future healthcare system to France and the Netherlands--whose plans he says is actually more similar to our proposed plans. It's a worthwhile read, I think.

Justin Fox points to an investment banker who says that the fault of the financial crisis should fall onto the people who bought toxic assets, not the people who created them. They should never believe that you can make a return on a riskless security. I still think there were many people at fault--after all, the true risk was not properly assessed by ratings agencies.

The French think they've done fiscal stimulus better than the Americans. Could be. Certainly, our more "free" system carries with it more risk and uncertainty. It's harder to get effective government action done here.

Catherine Rampell at Economix points out that the problem with the job market is a hiring slowdown, not layoffs.

Bernanke, job growth, healthcare, and fairness

FreeExchange voices their support of Bernanke. I think there hasn't been enough air time given to exactly what he has done and how it has helped the economy in the past year. In a similar vein, the NY Fed has provided a timeline of the financial crisis.

Michael Mandel reports on job growth over the past ten years. The graphs certainly do highlight the stark picture. Outside of healthcare, education, and the government, no sector has grown. Wow.

Donald Marron says that health is an R&D problem. There are a variety of problems with the current system, and a variety of solutions, and we're not sure how effective each solution would be. Marron seems to think we should take baby steps, and evaluate the progress of solutions as we go. An economist who wants more data? Shocking.

Fairness in economics. National economic policy isn't based solely on economic principles, nor are traditional mathematic economic principles the only factors that affect the economy. How people feel about their individual situations also affects their economic behaviors, including how fair they feel they are being treated. In short, we should take some lessons from sociology and psychology. Of course, this harkens back to a famous Keynes quote:

"The study of economics does not seem to require any specialized gifts of an unusually high order. Is it not, intellectually regarded, a very easy subject compared with the higher branches of philosophy or pure science? An easy subject at which few excel! The paradox finds its explanation, perhaps, in that the master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher—in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular in terms of the general and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man’s nature of his institutions must lie entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood; as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near to earth as a politician."

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.

Finance, Scrabble, and productivity

Free Exchange challenges a Dean Baker statement in which Baker essentially claims that the current economic situation is due more in part to the housing bubble rather than the financial sector. Free Exchange points out that the two are tied together. In that vein, Mark Thoma quotes Krugman as saying that we need to get rid of so-called shadow banking.

On a lighter note, Jeff Ely applies auctions to Scrabble with interesting results.

Robert Waldeman hypothesizes that, in the 90s and naughts, the productivity increases were due to downsizing. It's an interesting idea--and quite possibly some of the story--but I think that, at best, it works in tandem with the standard theory. Who ever said that there could only be one reason for productivity increases in the 90s?

A round on healthcare

In a piece of news that no doubt highlights the need for healthcare reform, healthcare costs are expected to jump 9% for companies in 2010. More on healthcare: an interesting note in the comments section at Angry Bear on Singapore. And, some thoughts on different plans, with links to more information, from ataxingmatter. E.J. Dionne at the Washington Post would prefer to have good rather than bipartisan reform. I was recently thinking about healthcare reform--Democrats (as well as many others, including health economists) claim that they can provide more care to more people while saving a lot of money. I'm not sure what problem the Republicans have with this. So I asked around, and the answer I got was the ideological problem against the concept of socialism. Not only does the argument not apply very well, but public investment hasn't been all that bad, historically. You'd think Republicans could back a single payer option considering all the horror stories of the current state of affairs, and the prospect of saving a lot of money.

Then again, I think it's mostly politics. Republicans can get some of what they want without giving up much political capital. On the other hand, Republicans need to get their names on some successful bills if they want to have a chance of winning back more seats in the future. If Democrats can claim to have fixed the system and saved a lot of money at the same time, what can Republicans run on?

Batteries, aid, old experiments, macroeconomics, and taxes.

Lithium ion batteries might start getting cheaper, as we may get a mass producer in the United States. Battery news excites me.

Felix Salmon wades into the developmental economics debate of the success and failure of aid, and is plugging a new book on the subject. I wonder what Easterly would say about the book.

Tim Harford talks about old experiments, and some efforts to rethink the studies.

Steve Chapman at reasononline takes on macroeconomists saying, essentially, that the field is very politicized, and this is partially a result of it being a less definite field.

Nancy Folbre thinks about why people who support raising taxes are wealthy. I think it's more about deeply ingrained ideologies. Though, it's strange that people on the lower end of the income spectrum aren't more strongly supporting their own taxes being lowered.