It seems like if you want to make a crappy song popular, all you have to do is come up with a dance for it. Examples:
Macarena
Cha Cha Slide
Boot Scootin' Boogie (not such a bad song)
Soulja Boy - Crank Dat
Achy Breaky Heart
Electric Slide (also, not such a bad song)
Hand Jive
Chicken Dance
Chicken Noodle Soup (I know they made the song to go with the dance, but still)
Honestly, do you think these songs would be nearly as popular if they didn't come up with an overly simplified way to make white people think they can dance?
Friday, November 30, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Minimum Wage Increase
For a good primer on minimum wage facts, visit the Employment Policies Institute.
Like the majority of economists, I am against raising the minimum wage. I certainly don't hate poor people nor do I want to keep them down for some personal benefit. Here is how I see the minimum wage issue... Assume that the labor market is segmented into low-, medium-, and high-skill workers. Assume further that the low-skill labor market is currently in equilibrium at price Peq and quantity Qeq. Now, raise the price of labor (wage) creating an artificial price floor (aka minimum wage) in the low-skill market. Raising the minimum wage will not affect medium- and high-skill workers who currently earn above the new proposed minimum wage.
At a price P1, the amount of workers actually hired falls from the current equilibrium rate Qeq to Qd, the amount that firms are willing to hire at price P1 (people/households "supply" the labor, unlike most other graphs you're used to seeing where firms supply televisions and people demand them).
Here's the tradeoff: people who keep their jobs earn more money, but some people lose their jobs entirely. All workers whose marginal revenue product is between P1 and Peq will be fired. However, people who do keep their jobs are likely to have any benefits reduced so that the employer can help offset the cash outflow of raising the wage. Now you're saying that minimum wage earners don't get 2 weeks paid vacation. While that's true, they could be forced to work more hours off the books after the wage increase or they could be given fewer hours per week.
It is a misconception that most people who earn minimum wage are heads of poor households. This misconception inclines people to think of anti-minimum-wage-hikers as cold hearted bastards. The fact is that around 15% of minimum wage earners are actually heads of poor households. Most minimum wage earners are earning a second (or higher order) income for the family. Many are teenagers or working mothers. Over the course of a few months, most minimum wage earners can earn a raise based on their own merit/performance. This may not be true in menial jobs or ones where you pretty much do nothing productive (e.g. Night Owls *which I heard is now discontinued thanks to Ed Fulton*). HOWEVER, if the minimum wage is raised from Peq to P1, then all of a sudden, there is an excess supply of workers, meaning that minimum wage employees are now expendable. One can be hired and another is more than happy to fill the vacancy.
More effective ways to get more money into the pockets of the working poor is through programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit that allows workers to make more money tax free or through HUD voucher programs that effectively augment family income by giving money toward paying rent. Raising the minimum wage won't be beneficial. Not now, not ever.
Like the majority of economists, I am against raising the minimum wage. I certainly don't hate poor people nor do I want to keep them down for some personal benefit. Here is how I see the minimum wage issue... Assume that the labor market is segmented into low-, medium-, and high-skill workers. Assume further that the low-skill labor market is currently in equilibrium at price Peq and quantity Qeq. Now, raise the price of labor (wage) creating an artificial price floor (aka minimum wage) in the low-skill market. Raising the minimum wage will not affect medium- and high-skill workers who currently earn above the new proposed minimum wage.
At a price P1, the amount of workers actually hired falls from the current equilibrium rate Qeq to Qd, the amount that firms are willing to hire at price P1 (people/households "supply" the labor, unlike most other graphs you're used to seeing where firms supply televisions and people demand them).Here's the tradeoff: people who keep their jobs earn more money, but some people lose their jobs entirely. All workers whose marginal revenue product is between P1 and Peq will be fired. However, people who do keep their jobs are likely to have any benefits reduced so that the employer can help offset the cash outflow of raising the wage. Now you're saying that minimum wage earners don't get 2 weeks paid vacation. While that's true, they could be forced to work more hours off the books after the wage increase or they could be given fewer hours per week.
It is a misconception that most people who earn minimum wage are heads of poor households. This misconception inclines people to think of anti-minimum-wage-hikers as cold hearted bastards. The fact is that around 15% of minimum wage earners are actually heads of poor households. Most minimum wage earners are earning a second (or higher order) income for the family. Many are teenagers or working mothers. Over the course of a few months, most minimum wage earners can earn a raise based on their own merit/performance. This may not be true in menial jobs or ones where you pretty much do nothing productive (e.g. Night Owls *which I heard is now discontinued thanks to Ed Fulton*). HOWEVER, if the minimum wage is raised from Peq to P1, then all of a sudden, there is an excess supply of workers, meaning that minimum wage employees are now expendable. One can be hired and another is more than happy to fill the vacancy.
More effective ways to get more money into the pockets of the working poor is through programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit that allows workers to make more money tax free or through HUD voucher programs that effectively augment family income by giving money toward paying rent. Raising the minimum wage won't be beneficial. Not now, not ever.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Too Many Choices
Hey, do you want some ice cream?
What if I asked: Do you want chocolate ice cream, cookies and cream ice cream, apple pie, key lime pie, brownies, cookies, or cupcakes for dessert?
Which question is easier to answer?
The Dutch government commissioned an experimental economic study (Schram, Sonnemans. "How Individuals Choose Health Insurance: An Experimental Analysis." forthcoming) on how people choose health insurance plans when presented with different options. They found that when people have more options, they look at more absolute information, but less relative information and end up making worse choices. I think this is true in just about every decision-making environment.
The more choices you have, the more time you take to make a decision, and you process less information about each option on average, while it's even harder to pick a clear winner.
When I was home over Thanksgiving, my mom made some (pretty bad) brownies. She said that she tried to get just plain old, regular brownies. Apparently there are 5,311 different kinds the store offers now with all kinds of options. Let a brownie be a multidimensional good B(C,K,M,T)
Where:
Chocolate set {milk, dutch, dark, Hershey brand, double, white}
Kind set {chewy, cake-like, thick}
Mix-ins {walnuts, nothing, chocolate syrup, another color mix for marbling}
Toppings {chocolate syrup, icing, different kind of icing, none, nuts}
As you can see, there are too many choices for brownies (all the permutations that give you different types of Brownies = B(C,K,M,T). You stand there for hours debating which box you should pick up. They all have different properties along the dimensions of: taste, cooking time, price, ease of making, consistency, size. This is just too much info for somebody to process. I say just put out a box of brownies with nuts and syrup and icing all in separately sealed containers, so you can either choose to use them or not when you start baking. I guess you could just pick what's most important to you and come up with a time-saving choice rule (I will get the one with the Hershey brand, no matter what the other components are).
Buying a new car or choosing which candidate to vote for have the same sorts of problems. Both things are so multidimensional that it's almost sure that one package will fall short of the other on at least one dimension. You have to decide how to rank the importance of each component of the package and come up with a decision rule that lets you pick something that's available. It's just about impossible to find a political candidate that you agree with on every issue or a car that's perfect in every way.
What if I asked: Do you want chocolate ice cream, cookies and cream ice cream, apple pie, key lime pie, brownies, cookies, or cupcakes for dessert?
Which question is easier to answer?
The Dutch government commissioned an experimental economic study (Schram, Sonnemans. "How Individuals Choose Health Insurance: An Experimental Analysis." forthcoming) on how people choose health insurance plans when presented with different options. They found that when people have more options, they look at more absolute information, but less relative information and end up making worse choices. I think this is true in just about every decision-making environment.
The more choices you have, the more time you take to make a decision, and you process less information about each option on average, while it's even harder to pick a clear winner.
When I was home over Thanksgiving, my mom made some (pretty bad) brownies. She said that she tried to get just plain old, regular brownies. Apparently there are 5,311 different kinds the store offers now with all kinds of options. Let a brownie be a multidimensional good B(C,K,M,T)
Where:
Chocolate set {milk, dutch, dark, Hershey brand, double, white}
Kind set {chewy, cake-like, thick}
Mix-ins {walnuts, nothing, chocolate syrup, another color mix for marbling}
Toppings {chocolate syrup, icing, different kind of icing, none, nuts}
As you can see, there are too many choices for brownies (all the permutations that give you different types of Brownies = B(C,K,M,T). You stand there for hours debating which box you should pick up. They all have different properties along the dimensions of: taste, cooking time, price, ease of making, consistency, size. This is just too much info for somebody to process. I say just put out a box of brownies with nuts and syrup and icing all in separately sealed containers, so you can either choose to use them or not when you start baking. I guess you could just pick what's most important to you and come up with a time-saving choice rule (I will get the one with the Hershey brand, no matter what the other components are).
Buying a new car or choosing which candidate to vote for have the same sorts of problems. Both things are so multidimensional that it's almost sure that one package will fall short of the other on at least one dimension. You have to decide how to rank the importance of each component of the package and come up with a decision rule that lets you pick something that's available. It's just about impossible to find a political candidate that you agree with on every issue or a car that's perfect in every way.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
You Are What You Do
What you do is who you are. How else could one be identified. I guess it's possible to define something by what it's not (something is dry if it is not wet...).
When I identify myself, it's always with something that I do. I'll tell you that I'm a runner (I'm starting to say triathlete), a student, a nice guy, a low-grade adventure seeker, an economist, or a chemist (usually chemist is in the past tense). I don't say that I'm white. I was born white and there's nothing I can do to change that. It's not something that I do. I am an environmentalist, but not the militant kind. That's because I do the 3Rs, ride my bike for transportation when possible, buy recycled, etc. but I don't chain myself to trees or live in a tree. I don't normally say that I'm a man or an American...once again, those are things that are either obvious or irrelevant.
When I try to identify other people, I identify them by what they do. They might be partiers or dancers, mechanics or video-gamers, impulsive or cool, birdwatchers or knitters, slackers or gangsters. I would like other people to evaluate me based on the merits of what I do.
When I identify myself, it's always with something that I do. I'll tell you that I'm a runner (I'm starting to say triathlete), a student, a nice guy, a low-grade adventure seeker, an economist, or a chemist (usually chemist is in the past tense). I don't say that I'm white. I was born white and there's nothing I can do to change that. It's not something that I do. I am an environmentalist, but not the militant kind. That's because I do the 3Rs, ride my bike for transportation when possible, buy recycled, etc. but I don't chain myself to trees or live in a tree. I don't normally say that I'm a man or an American...once again, those are things that are either obvious or irrelevant.
When I try to identify other people, I identify them by what they do. They might be partiers or dancers, mechanics or video-gamers, impulsive or cool, birdwatchers or knitters, slackers or gangsters. I would like other people to evaluate me based on the merits of what I do.
Monday, November 26, 2007
A Traffic Externality
The act of one individual driving imposes costs on the rest of society. Among them, there is pollution in the air, wear & tear on the road, increasing probability of an accident on that road, and slowing other people down. Since drivers do not take these external costs into account when deciding when/how much to drive, there is an aggregate effect of too much driving.
When I just drove for my Thanksgiving trip home, I left Tuesday night around 8:30 to get home and Saturday night around 10:30 to get back to Tallahassee. I wasn't trying to stay out of other people's way, rather I was trying to not have them get in my way. If you think about it, you don't really slow down each other car very much. However, when you add up the amount of time that every car is slowed down by you, it gets to be substantial on a non-open road. The effect is more compounded with a higher density of cars...you slow somebody down who then slows the cars behind him even more...
I'm not suggesting that you take other people's time into account when deciding how to plan your driving trips. In fact, I don't do it. I plan for myself. Try to avoid busy streets to save yourself time, gas, and frustration. Don't go somewhere at rush hour. Drive smarter for yourself and you help everyone out.
When I just drove for my Thanksgiving trip home, I left Tuesday night around 8:30 to get home and Saturday night around 10:30 to get back to Tallahassee. I wasn't trying to stay out of other people's way, rather I was trying to not have them get in my way. If you think about it, you don't really slow down each other car very much. However, when you add up the amount of time that every car is slowed down by you, it gets to be substantial on a non-open road. The effect is more compounded with a higher density of cars...you slow somebody down who then slows the cars behind him even more...
I'm not suggesting that you take other people's time into account when deciding how to plan your driving trips. In fact, I don't do it. I plan for myself. Try to avoid busy streets to save yourself time, gas, and frustration. Don't go somewhere at rush hour. Drive smarter for yourself and you help everyone out.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Friday, November 23, 2007
Camouflaged Lizard
I love the way this guy blends in to the ant-hill/log on which he's standing. View full size for better effect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
