Mainstream Economics Thread

[Kat Kid]

D.C., NYC, SF all seem incredibly stupid in their ability to manage housing supply.  It is incomprehensible really.

[kim carnes]

D.C., NYC, SF all seem incredibly stupid in their ability to manage housing supply.  It is incomprehensible really.

it is intentional

[sys]

D.C., NYC, SF all seem incredibly stupid in their ability to manage housing supply.  It is incomprehensible really.

if you were a property owner in an extremely desirable place to live, where housing supply was constrained, for whatever reason (obviously, manhattan and sf are extremely constrained by geography, aside from whatever planning constraints exist) and as a result, your property was incredibly valuable, how happy would you be about increasing housing supply?

[michigancat]

D.C., NYC, SF all seem incredibly stupid in their ability to manage housing supply.  It is incomprehensible really.

if you were a property owner in an extremely desirable place to live, where housing supply was constrained, for whatever reason (obviously, manhattan and sf are extremely constrained by geography, aside from whatever planning constraints exist) and as a result, your property was incredibly valuable, how happy would you be about increasing housing supply?

Yeah, the governments and policy definitely cater to property owners. The tenants just get mad at techies and Ellis Act evictions.

[steve dave]

lol kk

[wetwillie]

1000 houses just went up on 3500 square foot lots in another north dallas suburb before I could post this.

[mocat]

For some people that sounds like paradise, and for others it sounds like throw-up stuff in the mouth

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Guys, MSEcon is about explaining and excusing away the failures of our present economic policies. Lots of  its out of our control because of [insert vague allusion]. 

For example, the unemployment, underemployment rate is because of our aging population and technology outpacing education.  Its not economics at all, just lazy talking points contrived by democrats.

[Kat Kid]

building restrictions are pretty disastrous policy for city/county/state govt. because of all of the infrastructure costs first and foremost, but there are other costs as well.  While govt. are never going to be as self-interested as the interests lobbying them, a lot of the policy and discussion surrounding housing does not reflect any understanding of the true costs imposed by the rent-seeking behavior of property owners.

[sys]

there's prolly a better thread to place this in, but i didn't see it as quickly as i saw this one.  fascinating video.

[michigancat]

there's prolly a better thread to place this in, but i didn't see it as quickly as i saw this one.  fascinating video.

wish they could just share the text.

[sys]

i'm not sure i understand your comment.  are you saying you'd rather read a story than watch a vid?  normally, i would as well.  this is a good video, though.  well worth the 15 minutes.

[michigancat]

i'm not sure i understand your comment.  are you saying you'd rather read a story than watch a vid?  normally, i would as well.  this is a good video, though.  well worth the 15 minutes.

yeah it got better. I thought it was going to be one of those annoying heavily edited "vlog" things that would save me a lot of time and be less annoying if they just shared the text.

[michigancat]

I watched it. I thought the info was exciting and inspiring and his tone was annoying and shortsighted. Just because he can't imagine new jobs doesn't mean they won't happen. Also, less wealth will be required to live a healthy life, thus making unemployment less worrisome. I haven't really thought this through much, but that's my initial reaction.

[sys]

I watched it. I thought the info was exciting and inspiring and his tone was annoying and shortsighted. Just because he can't imagine new jobs doesn't mean they won't happen. Also, less wealth will be required to live a healthy life, thus making unemployment less worrisome. I haven't really thought this through much, but that's my initial reaction.

work will still be done.  goods and services produced.  it's a matter of distribution of the production, if payment for work performed by humans no longer works to widely distribute those goods and services.  could be a paradise, could be hell.

that's my reaction.


btw, i saw this somewhere.  kinda fits.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/blog/2014/jul/23/carlos-slim-three-day-working-week-expert-debate-workable

[sys]

http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/515926/how-technology-is-destroying-jobs/

[michigancat]

http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/515926/how-technology-is-destroying-jobs/

Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence, according to Brynjolfsson, is a chart that only an economist could love. In economics, productivity—the amount of economic value created for a given unit of input, such as an hour of labor—is a crucial indicator of growth and wealth creation. It is a measure of progress. On the chart Brynjolfsson likes to show, separate lines represent productivity and total employment in the United States. For years after World War II, the two lines closely tracked each other, with increases in jobs corresponding to increases in productivity. The pattern is clear: as businesses generated more value from their workers, the country as a whole became richer, which fueled more economic activity and created even more job

Will read the rest later, but past WWII America is both a small blip in world economic history and a unique situation that shouldn't be expected to repeat itself.

That doesn't mean that the article is invalid, but IMO "the most damning piece of evidence" is.

[sys]

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/428429/when-machines-do-your-job/

What is the optimistic view?

Erik Brynjolfsson came up with a great phrase: “digital Athens.” The Athenian citizens had lives of leisure; they got to participate in democracy and create art. That was largely because they had slaves to do the work. Okay, I don’t want human slaves, but in a very, very automated and digitally productive economy you don’t need to work as much, as hard, with as many people, to get the fruits of the economy. So the optimistic version is that we finally have more hours in our week freed up from toil and drudgery.

[michigancat]

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/428429/when-machines-do-your-job/

What is the optimistic view?

Erik Brynjolfsson came up with a great phrase: “digital Athens.” The Athenian citizens had lives of leisure; they got to participate in democracy and create art. That was largely because they had slaves to do the work. Okay, I don’t want human slaves, but in a very, very automated and digitally productive economy you don’t need to work as much, as hard, with as many people, to get the fruits of the economy. So the optimistic version is that we finally have more hours in our week freed up from toil and drudgery.

good advice

To the parent, make sure your kid’s education is geared toward things that machines appear not to be very good at. Computers are still lousy at programming computers. Computers are still bad at figuring out what questions need to be answered. I would encourage every kid these days to buckle down and do a double major, one in the liberal arts and one in the college of sciences.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.


Guys, mainstream economics is about apologizing away the failure that are the economic policies of the social welfare state. How, rather than help bring people up, it forces more people into relative poverty. 

[michigancat]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.

you make the liberal arts degree a second degree.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.

you make the liberal arts degree a second degree.

Why even bother with it?  Take the cost (and opportunity cost) of another year of school and do something more worthwhile with it.

[michigancat]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.

you make the liberal arts degree a second degree.

Why even bother with it?  Take the cost (and opportunity cost) of another year of school and do something more worthwhile with it.

I don't think it would take another year of school if you did knew you were doing it from the start and planned accordingly.

[kim carnes]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.

you make the liberal arts degree a second degree.

Why even bother with it?  Take the cost (and opportunity cost) of another year of school and do something more worthwhile with it.

I don't think it would take another year of school if you did knew you were doing it from the start and planned accordingly.

um.. how would it not?

[michigancat]

Not sure you need to "buckle down" to get a degree in liberal arts, and positive it has no value.  Save the 30k in student loans and the corresponding indentured servitude.

you make the liberal arts degree a second degree.

Why even bother with it?  Take the cost (and opportunity cost) of another year of school and do something more worthwhile with it.

I don't think it would take another year of school if you did knew you were doing it from the start and planned accordingly.

um.. how would it not?

there could be lots of overlap between the majors. I think it would still be worth an extra year though