Seeing the price of haircuts rise, even relative to other things I might spend my money on, is the sort of thing to make an economist rail about anti-competitive behaviour. But is that really the case, or are higher haircut prices just a sign of a strengthening New Zealand economy? Gulnara and I have a think about this in a recent video.
For those who don’t like videos, there is a transcript below.
Read more
It is a pity that the World Bank’s Chief Economist Penny Goldberg has resigned after being in a role for only 15 months. Her resignation appears linked to the scandal around the financial aid leakage to private accounts in financial havens.
The brief story is that when the World Bank provides financial aid to aid dependent countries, some of these funds appear to be transferred into the private accounts of the “elites” in the countries mostly known as “financial havens”. She then left because the research on this issue wouldn’t be published by the World Bank.
Randomized control trial (RTC) studies are getting more and more attention among policymakers in the last few decades. In addition, the RCT is one of the core experimental methodologies used by the recent nobel prize laureates in economics Duflo, Kremer and Banerjee.
Given the excitement around these methods, Chicago University has recently run the IGM Economic Experts Panel asking economic experts on whether the “ Randomized control trials are a valuable tool for making significant progress in poverty reduction”. The results of the poll are summarized in the graph below.
The chart above highlights respondents’ agreement distribution. What struck me most from the results was Angus Deaton’s strong disagreement with the statement – especially given that he is an expert in the field.
Read moreVia Overcoming Bias I spotted this paper on global income inequality, 1970-2009. Robin points out to be careful, as this doesn’t capture non-financial inequality, and it doesn’t look at the “lifecycle” of individuals – just snapshots of income dispersion at a point in time. Of course, these missing bits are due to data limitations, the authors would have known this full well.
It shows the global static income inequality has fallen, especially over the last decade. Lovely. However, we only get a small part of the story by looking at that graph – the paper also decomposed changes in the global Gini coefficient into ‘between’, ‘within’, and ‘overlapping’ components. In fact, this decomposition was really the main purpose of the paper!
So let us talk about these things, talk about what happened with them, and see where that leaves us 🙂
Back in 1991, Larry Summers upset a lot of people as Chief Economist at the World Bank. His memo has been viewed as morally reprehensible, was cited in the second chapter of this book as indicative of the way economists ignore moral values, and was used as a key example in a philosophy class I sat in of the untenable nature of economic arguments.
But, as a description of what would happen if people in LDC’s (least developed countries) had the choice, was he actually correct?
I have heard this sort of claim quite a bit from friends in recent months:
World's 100 richest people earned enough in 2012 – $240bn – to end world extreme poverty 4x over #inequalityfacts
— Max Rashbrooke (@MaxRashbrooke) September 18, 2013
Doesn’t that sound grand – if the richest 100 people in the world gave up a quarter of their income then SLAM poverty gone. Ez.
However, this isn’t quite right. In fact it is very much not right.
