Monday, February 24, 2014
Business Women
The Washington Post ran a story this morning about a company called FlexProfessionals. The business helps professionals who have been out of the labor force return to the labor force. The founder has an MBA from Harvard. the business generated over $1 million in revenue last year. This is the photograph that went with the story. I did not find the photo online; consequently, this is a picture of the photograph I took with the camera attached to my computer. It struck me as odd that they would be portrayed sitting on the floor. I do not believe that I have ever seen articles about business men that show them sitting next to each on the floor.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Minimum Wages
This is from the Economist, suggesting, in response to Noah Smith, that micro is not the good economics. the author offers up the minimum wage as his example.
There are three things that both me about the article.
First, the author states that if you "ask any two economists – macro, micro, whatever – whether raising the minimum wage will reduce employment for the low skilled, and odds are you will get two answers." The link is to a survey of well known economists. Click on the link. The survey asked the economists to respond to this
"Question A: Raising the federal minimum wage to $9 per hour would make it noticeably harder for low-skilled workers to find employment." I have seen this survey cited several times. The actual question is almost never stated. To an economist the questions are actually quite different. The economists question is about the direction of change will it reduce employment or not? The actuial question was about the size of the change will it be "noticeably harder?" To an economist that is a question about the elasticity of demand not the sloe of the demand curve. Microeconomic theory alone does not make a prediction about the size of the change, whether it will be noticeably harder. That is an empirical question. with that in mind, look at the results of the survey. The most significant ting to note about the results is that none of the economists said that they strongly agree or strongly disagree, and about one quarter simply said they were uncertain. the rest were split between agree and disagree. In other words, when asked an empricial question which most of them had probably not conducted first hand research on, economists either replied "I don't know" or "my best guess is ...."
Second, it is not clear that this is a micro question. The survey and the Economist article seem to be talking about the aggregate amount of employment of low skilled workers. Not the employment in a particular market. I tell students the difference between micro and macro is that micro deals with particular markets and macro deals with aggregates.
Third, the time series data on the effects of the minimum wage on the employment of low skill workers (the direction of change) seems to be pretty consistent. The size of the change, whther it is noticeable, is not, however, very consistent.
Consider this graph from http://idiosyncraticwhisk.blogspot.com/2014/01/teen-employment-and-minimum-wage-60.html via Marginal Revolution
![]()
There are three things that both me about the article.
First, the author states that if you "ask any two economists – macro, micro, whatever – whether raising the minimum wage will reduce employment for the low skilled, and odds are you will get two answers." The link is to a survey of well known economists. Click on the link. The survey asked the economists to respond to this
"Question A: Raising the federal minimum wage to $9 per hour would make it noticeably harder for low-skilled workers to find employment." I have seen this survey cited several times. The actual question is almost never stated. To an economist the questions are actually quite different. The economists question is about the direction of change will it reduce employment or not? The actuial question was about the size of the change will it be "noticeably harder?" To an economist that is a question about the elasticity of demand not the sloe of the demand curve. Microeconomic theory alone does not make a prediction about the size of the change, whether it will be noticeably harder. That is an empirical question. with that in mind, look at the results of the survey. The most significant ting to note about the results is that none of the economists said that they strongly agree or strongly disagree, and about one quarter simply said they were uncertain. the rest were split between agree and disagree. In other words, when asked an empricial question which most of them had probably not conducted first hand research on, economists either replied "I don't know" or "my best guess is ...."
Second, it is not clear that this is a micro question. The survey and the Economist article seem to be talking about the aggregate amount of employment of low skilled workers. Not the employment in a particular market. I tell students the difference between micro and macro is that micro deals with particular markets and macro deals with aggregates.
Third, the time series data on the effects of the minimum wage on the employment of low skill workers (the direction of change) seems to be pretty consistent. The size of the change, whther it is noticeable, is not, however, very consistent.
Consider this graph from http://idiosyncraticwhisk.blogspot.com/2014/01/teen-employment-and-minimum-wage-60.html via Marginal Revolution
Monday, January 6, 2014
ASSA in Philadelphia
I got back from the ASSA meetings in Philadelphia last night. I had some excellent food. We'll have to go back to Alma de Cuba when its warmer and try their ceviche sampler. We took Mary's students Leanne Roncolato and Megan Fasules out to Serpico, which had a really nice tasting menu. And Pumpkin cemented its position as my favorite place to eat in Phildelphia. Also went to Saint John the Evangelist Friday night.
I also attended some great sessions. The economic history sesions (organized by the Cliometric Society and the Economic History Association) were all excellent and very well attended. The one in which my wife, Mary Eschelbach Hansen and her student, Megan Fasules, presented was packed and both Paul Solman and Matt Yglesias were there. Yglesias even tweeted one of the slides from Mary and Megan's presentation.
Cliometric
Society Sessions
Spatial
Allocation of Conflict, Individuals, and Economic Activity
January
3, 2014, 12:30 – 2:15 pm, Philadelphia Marriott, Meeting Room 406
Organizer:
John Murray (Rhodes College)
Chair:
Mary Hansen (American University)
Discussants:
John Brown (Clark University), Allison Shertzer (University of Pittsburgh), Hugh
Rockoff (Rutgers), Chris Vickers (Northwestern)
“Railroads
and the Regional Concentration of Industry in Germany 1846 to 1882,” Theresa
Gutberlet (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute)
“Segregation
(Forever?): Measuring the Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Segregation,”
John Parman (College of William and Mary) and Trevon Logan (Ohio State
University and NBER)
“Military
Conflict and the Economic Rise of Urban Europe,” Mark Dincecco (University of
Michigan) and Massimiliano Onorato (IMT Institute for Advanced Studies)
“Murder
and the Black Market: Prohibition’s Impact on Homicide Rates in American
Cities,” Brendan Livingston (???)
Enterprising
America: Businesses, Banks, and Credit Markets in Historical Perspective
January
3, 2014, 2:30 – 4:30 pm, Philadelphia Marriott, Meeting Room 406
Organizer:
John Murray (Rhodes College)
Chair:
William Collins (Vanderbilt and NBER)
Discussants:
Carola Frydman (Boston University and NBER), William Collins (Vanderbilt and
NBER), Matt Jaremski (Colgate University and NBER)
“Corporate
Governance and the Establishment of Manufacturing Enterprises in New England,”
Eric Hilt, (Wellesley College and NBER)
“Economies
of Scale in Nineteenth Century American Manufacturing Revisited: A Resolution of
the Entrepreneurial Labor Input Problem,” Robert A. Margo (Boston University and
NBER)
“How
Does Governance Matter? An Examination of the Long-Term Evolution of Bank Boards
in the United States, 1800-1933,” Howard Bodenhorn (Clemson University and NBER)
and Eugene White (Rutgers University and NBER)
Technology
and Property Rights
January
4, 2014, 2:30 – 4:30 pm, Philadelphia Marriott, Meeting Room 406
Organizer:
John Murray (Rhodes College)
Chair:
David Mitch (University of Maryland-Baltimore County)
Discussants:
Lisa Cook (Michigan State), Carol Shiue (University of Colorado), Ahmed Rahman
(U.S. Naval Academy), Susan Wolcott (Binghamton University)
“Copyright
and the Diffusion of Classical Music,” Petra Moser (Stanford University) and
Jerry Lao (Stanford University)
“The
Great Divergence and the Economics of Printing,” Luis Angeles (University of
Glasgow)
“Turning
Points in Leadership: Shipping Technology in the Portuguese and Dutch Merchant
Empires,” Claudia Rei (Vanderbilt University)
“Industrial
development and technology adoption in late nineteenth century Japan,” John Tang
(Australia National University)
Economic
History Association Sessions
Poverty
from a Historical Viewpoint
January
4, 2014, 12:30 – 2:15 pm, Philadelphia Marriott, Meeting Room 307
Organizer:
Martha Bailey (University of Michigan)
Chair:
Robert Margo (Boston University)
Discussants:
Tom Vogl (Princeton), Robert Margo (Boston University), Melissa Thomasson (Miami
University – Ohio), Rob Gillezeau (New Democratic Party, Ontario Canada)
“Up
from Poverty? The 1832 Cherokee Land Lottery and the Long-run Distribution of
Wealth,” Joseph Ferrie (Northwestern University) and Hoyt Bleakley (University
of Chicago)
“The
Effects of Childhood Means-tested Cash Transfers on Mortality: Evidence from the
Mother’s Pension Programs,” Shari Eli (University of Toronto), Anna Aizer (Brown
University), Adriana Lleras-Muney (UCLA), and Joseph Ferrie (Northwestern
University)
“Interactions
between Social Insurance Programs: The Impact of Medicare on the Characteristics
of Petitioners for Bankruptcy,” Megan Lynn Fasules (American University) and
Mary Eschelbach Hansen (American University)
“Poverty
and Progress among Canadian Immigrants, 1911-1931,” Chris Minns (London School
of Economics), Kris Inwood (University of Guelph) and Fraser Summerfield
(University of Guelph)
Reception
hosted by the Cliometric Society
Saturday,
January 4th, 6:00-8:00 pm
Philadelphia
Marriott Downtown - Meeting Room 403
Banking
January
5, 2014, 10:15 am – 12:15 pm, Philadelphia Marriott, Meeting Room 307
Organizer:
Martha Bailey (University of Michigan)
Chair:
Hugh Rockoff (Rutgers)
Discussants:
Dominick Bartelme (UC Berkeley), Joshua Hausman (University of Michigan),
Jonathan Rose (Federal Reserve Board)
“American
Banking and the Transportation Revolution Before the Civil War,” Matthew
Jaremski (Colgate University), Jeremy Atack (Vanderbilt University), and Peter
Rousseau (Vanderbilt University)
“Central
Bank Credibility and Reputation: An Historical Exploration,” Pierre Siklos
(Wilfrid Laurier University) and Michael Bordo (Rutgers University)
“Financial
Liberalization and Bank Failures: The United States Free Banking Experience,"
Philipp Ager (University of Southern Denmark) and Fabrizio Spargoli (Erasmus
University)
Monday, December 16, 2013
More open access
I just received an email from the British Journal of Economics, Management and Trade. They are currently offering to publish papers for only $100. Maybe I've missed the boat in the online journal business; competition appears to be heating up.
This journal claims that
In order to maintain highest level of transparency and high standard of review, this journal presently follows highly respected and toughest Advanced OPEN peer-review system (ExampleLink1, Link2, Link3, Link4, Link5, Link6, Link7, Link8, Link9, Link10, etc.). We hope that you will appreciate this Advanced OPEN peer-review system, which is expected to give doubtless scholarly benefit and impact to the authors in long run. Additionally we strongly encourage and promote “Post-publication Peer review” by our comment section.
Doubtless scholarly benefit and impact in long run for only $100. Sounds like a great deal.
This journal claims that
In order to maintain highest level of transparency and high standard of review, this journal presently follows highly respected and toughest Advanced OPEN peer-review system (ExampleLink1, Link2, Link3, Link4, Link5, Link6, Link7, Link8, Link9, Link10, etc.). We hope that you will appreciate this Advanced OPEN peer-review system, which is expected to give doubtless scholarly benefit and impact to the authors in long run. Additionally we strongly encourage and promote “Post-publication Peer review” by our comment section.
Doubtless scholarly benefit and impact in long run for only $100. Sounds like a great deal.
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Believe It Or Not: The Online Journal Business
This not a joke. I keep getting these emails, like the one below, encouraging me to publish in an online open access journal. This one comes from the Center for Promoting Ideas. Really, its named the Center for Promoting Ideas. They published 24 issues of this particular journal, the International Journal of Humanities and social Sciences, last year. I looked at one of the issues, and it appeared to contain about 40 articles. They charge authors $200 per article and publish six different journals. If you published 24 issues of 6 journals with 40 articles each, charging $200 to each author, you could bring in $1,152,000. Maybe I should get into the online journal business.
Their standards for peer review are clearly pretty rigorous. You have to submit by December 31 to get your paper in the January 31 issue.
Call for
Papers
International
Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IJHSS)
ISSN
2220-8488 (Print), 2221- 0989 (Online)
International
Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IJHSS)
is an open access, peer-reviewed and refereed international journal published by
Center for Promoting Ideas, USA. The main objective of IJHSS is to
provide an intellectual platform for the international scholars. IJHSS aims to
promote interdisciplinary studies in humanities and social science and become
the leading journal in humanities and social science in the world.
The journal
publishes research papers in the fields of humanities and social science such
as anthropology, business studies, communication studies, corporate
governance ,criminology, cross-cultural
studies ,demography, development studies, economics, education, ethics,
geography, history, industrial
relations, information science, international
relations, law, linguistics, library science, media studies, methodology, philosophy, political science, population
Studies, psychology, public administration, sociology, social
welfare, linguistics ,literature, paralegal, performing arts (music, theatre
& dance), religious studies ,visual arts, women studies and so
on.
The
journal is published in both print and online versions.
The
journal is now indexed with and included in Cabell’s, Ulrich’s, DOAJ, Index
Copernicus International, EBSCO and Gale. Moreover the journal is under the
indexing process with ISI, ERIC, Econlit, Scopus and Journalseek.
IJHSS
publishes
original papers, review papers, conceptual framework, analytical and simulation
models, case studies, empirical research, technical notes, and book
reviews.
IJHSS
is inviting papers for Vol. 4 No. 1 which is scheduled to be published on January 31, 2014. Last date of submission: December 31, 2013.However, an
early submission will get preference in case of review and publication process.
With
thanks,
Dr.
J. Sabrina Mims-Cox
The
Chief Editor, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science
(IJHSS)
Thursday, December 12, 2013
- Meera K.
@MeeraKal @Austan_Goolsbee can you take my econ final for me tomorrow? It's micro, so you should be okay :)#PleaseAndThanks
Austan Goolsbee
Friday, December 6, 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)