August 2006 – Page 3 – artdiamondblog.com

U.S. Economy Can Prosper, Even if G.M. Does Not

The fragility of success for large corporations is documented in the early chapters of the Foster and Kaplan book that is mentioned below.

(p. 1) THE announcement last week that General Motors would cut 25,000 jobs and close several factories is yet another blow to the Goliath of automakers and its workers. But only if you work for G.M. is the company’s decline a worry. For consumers, the decline can be seen as a symbol of healthy competition.

G.M.’s sales, market share and work force have all been falling for a generation, even as the quality of its vehicles has gone up. Why? Because its competitors’ products have improved even more. Today’s auto buyers enjoy an unprecedented array of well-built, well-equipped, reasonably priced vehicles offered by many manufacturers.

. . .

(p. 3) . . . even if a new generation is drawn to G.M.’s products, recovery of its former position seems unlikely.  Other brands have improved, too:  J.D. Power estimates that for the auto industry overall, manufacturing defects declined 32 percent since 1998 alone.

There is also great pressure to hold prices down, which is bad for companies like G.M. with vast amounts of overhead.  According to the consumer price index, new cars and light trucks today cost less in real-dollar terms than in 1982, despite having air bags, antilock brakes, CD players, power windows and other features either unavailable or considered luxury options back then.

This means that during the very period that General Motors has declined, American car buyers have become better off.  Competition can have the effect of ”creative destruction,” in the economist Joseph Schumpeter’s famous term, harming workers in some places, while everyone else comes out ahead.

. . .

As it continues to shrink, G.M. may serve as an exemplar of what the world economy will do in many arenas — knock off established leaders, while improving quality and cutting prices. In their 2001 book ”Creative Destruction,” Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan, analysts at McKinsey & Company, documented how even powerhouse companies that are ”built to last” usually succumb to competition.

Competition can be a utilitarian force that brings the greatest good to the greatest number. Someday when the remaining divisions of General Motors are bought by some start-up company that doesn’t even exist yet, try to keep that in mind.

For the full commentary, see:

GREGG EASTERBROOK. "What’s Bad for G.M. Is . . ." The New York Times, Section 4 (Sunday, June 12, 2005): 1 & 3.

(Note: the ellipsis in the title is in the original title; the ellipses in the article, were added.)

The full reference to the Foster and Kaplan book, is:

Foster, Richard and Sarah Kaplan. Creative Destruction: Why Companies that Are Built to Last Underperform the Market—and How to Successfully Transform Them. New York: Currency Books, 2001.

Static Assumptions Undermine Economic Policy Analysis

Over 50 years ago, Schumpeter emphasized that static models of capitalism miss what is most important in capitalism. Yet static analysis still dominates most policy discussions. But there is hope:

(p. A14) A bit of background: Most official analysis of tax policy is based on what economists call "static assumptions." While many microeconomic behavioral responses are included, the future path of macroeconomic variables such as the capital stock and GNP are assumed to stay the same, regardless of tax policy. This approach is not realistic, but it has been the tradition in tax analysis mainly because it is simple and convenient.

In his 2007 budget, President Bush directed the Treasury staff to develop a dynamic analysis of tax policy, and we are now reaping the fruits of those efforts. The staff uses a model that does not consider the short-run effects of tax policy on the business cycle, but instead focuses on its longer run effects on economic growth through the incentives to work, save and invest, and to allocate capital among competing uses.

For the full story, see:

ROBERT CARROLL and N. GREGORY MANKIW. "Dynamic Analysis." The Wall Street Journal (Weds., July 26, 2006): A14.

Taking the Red Pill in China

Surfing the Web last fall, a Chinese high-school student who calls himself Zivn noticed something missing. It was Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia that accepts contributions or edits from users, and that he himself had contributed to.

The Chinese government, in October, had added Wikipedia to a list of Web sites and phrases it blocks from Internet users’ access. For Zivn, trying to surf this and many other Web sites, including the BBC’s Chinese-language news service, brought just an error message. But the 17-year-old had had a taste of that wealth of information and wanted more. "There were so many lies among the facts, and I could not find where the truth is," he writes in an instant-message interview.

Then some friends told him where to find Freegate, a tiny software program that thwarts the Chinese government’s vast system to limit what its citizens see. Freegate — by connecting computers inside of China to servers in the U.S. — allows Zivn and others to keep reading and writing to Wikipedia and countless other sites.

Behind Freegate is a North Carolina-based Chinese hacker named Bill Xia. He calls it his red pill, a reference to the drug in the "Matrix" movies that vaulted unconscious captives of a totalitarian regime into the real world. Mr. Xia likes to refer to the villainous Agent Smith from the Matrix films, noting that the digital bad guy in sunglasses "guards the Matrix like China’s Public Security Bureau guards the Internet."

. . .

(p. A9) . . . , with each new version of Freegate — now on its sixth release — the censors "just keep improving and adding more manpower to monitor what we have been doing," Mr. Xia says. In turn, he and volunteer programmers keep tweaking Freegate.

At first, the software would automatically change its Internet Protocol address — a sort of phone number for a Web site — faster than China could block it. That worked until September 2002, when China blocked Freegate’s domain name, not just its number, in the Internet phone book.

More than three years later, Mr. Xia is still amazed by the bold move, calling it a "hijacking." Ultimately he prevailed, however, through a solution he won’t identify for fear of being shut down for good.

Confident in that solution, Mr. Xia continues to send out his red pill, and users like Zivn continue to take it. The teen credits his cultural and political perspective to a "generation gap" that has come of having access to more information. "I am just gradually getting used to the truth about the real world," he writes.

For the full story, see:

Geoffrey A. Fowler. "Chinese Internet Censors Face ‘Hacktivists’ in U.S." The Wall Street Journal (Monday, February 13, 2006): A1 & A9.

Entrepreneur Found Creative Way to Save Thousands of Babies

(p. 1) The babies were lined up under heaters and they breathed filtered air. Few of them weighed more than three pounds. They shared the Boardwalk there on Coney Island with Violetta the Armless Legless Wonder, Princess WeeWee, Ajax the Sword-Swallower and all the rest. From 1903 until the early 1940’s, premature infants in incubators were part of the carnival.

It cost a quarter to see the babies, and people came again and again, to coo and to gasp and say look how small, look how small. There were twins, even, George and Norma Johnson, born the day before Independence Day in 1937. They had four and a half pounds between them, appearing in the world a month too soon because Dorothy Johnson stepped off a curb wrong and went into labor.

All those quarters bought a big house at Sea Gate for Dr. Martin A. Couney, the man who put the Coney Island babies on display. He died broken and forgotten in 1950 at 80 years old. The doctor was shunned as an unseemly showman in his time, even as he was credited with popularizing incubators and saving thousands of babies. History did not know what to do; he was inspired and single-minded, distasteful and heroic, ultimately confounding.

. . .

(p. 31) He displayed incubators developed by his mentors at the Berlin Exposition of 1896, and though they caught on in Europe, acceptance was slower in the United States.

Using babies from New York hospitals that lacked the facilities to care for them, Dr. Couney mounted a display at Luna Park, a Coney Island amusement park, in 1903, soon adding another at a second Coney Island park, Dreamland.

. . .

At least 8,000 babies passed through the incubators, and the doctor was credited with saving at least 6,500, according to news reports of the time. The Johnson twins made it off the Boardwalk and grew up strong and tall. George Johnson found work, and a sense of freedom, driving trains up and down the coast for the Pennsylvania Railroad. Norma Johnson married a man named Coe. Between the twins there are nine children, 13 grandchildren and one great-grandchild. George and Norma attended Dr. Couney’s induction ceremony yesterday. "My father didn’t have any money, and this doctor says you can use our incubator for free, but you have to put them on display on Coney Island," Mr. Johnson said, sitting next to his sister on the porch at the Sheepshead Bay Yacht Club the other day. "It was us and a lot of other people, too."

The twins will turn 68 the day before Independence Day, old enough to enjoy the seaside air on an idle weekday morning.

Down the Boardwalk, the beach is open. Pretty girls and seagulls play their games. For a few dollars, you can watch a baseball game, shoot paint pellets at a hungry young dude or become a tattooed lady.

The likes of Martin A. Couney nobody has seen in 60 years.

For the full story, see:

MICHAEL BRICK. "And Next to the Bearded Lady, Premature Babies." The New York Times, Section 1 (Sun., June 12, 2005): 1 & 31.

(Note: ellipses added.)

The Johnson twins who were displayed, and whose lives were saved, by Dr. Couney. Source of photo: online version of NYT article cited above.

Audacity and Scale of Hurricane Katrina Waste and Fraud Are Amazing

Photo scanned in from my paper copy of the NYT issue cited below. Compare the version above to the cropped version that appeared in to online version below–whether deliverate or innocent, the effect of the cropping is to reduce the visual magnitude of the scene (and hence reduce the evidence of the magnitude of the waste).

(p. A1) WASHINGTON, June 26 — Among the many superlatives associated with Hurricane Katrina can now be added this one: it produced one of the most extraordinary displays of scams, schemes and stupefying bureaucratic bungles in modern history, costing taxpayers up to $2 billion.

A hotel owner in Sugar Land, Tex., has been charged with submitting $232,000 in bills for phantom victims. And roughly 1,100 prison inmates across the Gulf Coast apparently collected more than $10 million in rental and disaster-relief assistance.

There are the bureaucrats who ordered nearly half a billion dollars worth of mobile homes that are still empty, and renovations for a shelter at a former Alabama Army base that cost about $416,000 per evacuee.

And there is the Illinois woman who tried to collect federal benefits by claiming she watched her two daughters drown in the rising New Orleans waters. In fact, prosecutors say, the children did not exist.

The tally of ignoble acts linked to Hurricane Katrina, pulled together by The New York Times from government audits, criminal prosecutions and Congressional investigations, could rise because the inquiries are under way. Even in Washington, a city accustomed to government bloat, the numbers are generating amazement.

"The blatant fraud, the audacity of the schemes, the scale of the waste — it is just breathtaking," said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, and chairwoman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

For the full story, see:

ERIC LIPTON. "’Breathtaking’ Waste and Fraud in Hurricane Aid." The New York Times (Tues., June 27, 2006): A1 & A13.

Cropped version of the photo run in the online version of the NYT article cited above.

Source of the graphic: the online version of the NYT article cited above.

Five More Hours Per Week of Leisure Time in 2003 Than in 1965

The easiest way to measure leisure is to take survey data on how many hours a week people spend at work and subtract. Since 1965, the number of hours the average American works for pay has not changed much. By this simple measure, then, leisure has also stayed the same.

But are we really working as much as ever?

”All time away from work is not equal,” Erik Hurst, an economist at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Chicago, said in an interview. Some time off is actually just more work.

To put it in economic terms, we spend some time off the job in consumption (watching TV, hanging out with our friends, reading for pleasure) and some in production (cooking dinner, cleaning the house, doing household repairs). Some activities, like sleeping and eating, fall somewhere in between, while others, including child care and gardening, combine pleasure and production.

The difference is not just that we enjoy some activities and dislike others. It is that we could, in theory, pay someone else to do the production for us. A cook or a restaurant can make dinner, but nobody else can play golf or watch TV for you.

. . .

Americans are not, in fact, working as much as they used to. They are just getting paid for more of the work they do. Using several different definitions of leisure, Professor Hurst and Mark A. Aguiar, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, analyzed time-use surveys done from 1965 to 2003. Whether they defined leisure narrowly or broadly, they got a consistent result.

”Leisure time — measured in a variety of ways — has increased significantly between 1965 and 2003,” they write in ”Measuring Trends in Leisure: The Allocation of Time Over Five Decades,” a Boston Fed working paper. . . . Using the most restrictive definition, which includes only ”entertainment/social activities/relaxing” and ”active recreation,” the economists found that leisure had increased 5.1 hours a week, holding demographics like age constant. (Without that control, leisure has grown 4.6 hours.) Assuming a 40-hour work week, that is like adding six weeks of vacation — an enormous increase.

”I was surprised by the magnitude,” Mr. Aguiar said in an interview, though the general trend agrees with earlier research.

For the full commentary, see:

VIRGINIA POSTREL. "ECONOMIC SCENE; The Work You Do When You’re Not at Work." The New York Times (Thursday, February 23, 2006): C3.

A PDF of the NBER draft of the Aguiar and Hurst paper can be found at:

http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/erik.hurst/research/aguiar_hurst_leisure_nber_submit_final.pdf

Road Opens a Year Early: Contract Included Incentives

With monetary incentives to finish early, Hawkins Construction Company finishes westbound lanes a year ahead of schedule. Source of photo:
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=1636&u_sid=2214442&u_rnd=7720251

The long delays, and lack of visible progress in expanding 132nd, near our house, became a running joke—but the wasted travel time was not funny. Similar road construction delays were occuring all over town, to the point where it looked as though the issue might threaten the mayor’s re-election. So he got serious, and in new road contracts, included substantial monetary incentives for finishing the job ontime, and even more incentives to finish it early. The expressway pictured above is one of those built under the new contract. Maybe incentives really do matter?

(p. 1A) An electronic sign above West Dodge lured drivers with a simple message: "Expressway Open."

The real draw was the quicker commute drivers encountered Thursday evening during the first rush hour after the opening of the West Dodge Road Expressway.

After two years of construction, the expressway’s westbound bridge opened to traffic at 10:35 a.m. Thursday, more than a year ahead of schedule.

A steady flow of traffic streamed across the bridge Thursday evening.

"It was wonderful," said commuter Jean Crouchley.

For the full article, see:

MICHAEL O’CONNOR AND RICK RUGGLES. "A Concrete Example of Progress; Motorists Expect Daily Drives to be Quicker with New Route." Omaha World-Herald (Friday, July 28, 2006): 1-2.

(Note: The online version of the article had the title: "Making quick work of commute on Expressway.")

Schumpeter Not Invited to Milton Friedman’s Dinner Party

Rose and Milton Friedman. Source of image: the online venison of the WSJ article cited below.

Milton Friedman is one of my heroes. But my dinner party invitation list would include Hayek and Schumpeter in place of Marshall and Keynes.

If they were to throw a small dinner party . . . for Mr. Friedman’s favorite economists (dead or alive), who’d be invited? . . . he reeled off this answer: "Dead or alive, it’s clear that Adam Smith would be No. 1. Alfred Marshall would be No. 2. John Maynard Keynes would be No. 3. And George Stigler would be No. 4. George was one of our closest friends." (Here, Mrs. Friedman, also an economist of distinction, noted sorrowfully that "it’s hard to believe that George is dead.")

For the full interview, see:

TUNKU VARADARAJAN. "COMMENTARY: THE WEEKEND INTERVIEW; Rose and Milton Friedman; The Romance of Economics." The Wall Street Journal (Sat., July 22, 2006): A10.

“The More Sweatshops the Better”

JACQUELINE NOVOGRATZ, a veteran of the Rockefeller Foundation and a former consultant to the World Bank, talks enthusiastically about the development of a company in Africa where some 2,000 women earn, on average, $1.80 a day producing antimalarial bed netting. With the assistance of a $350,000 loan from an American investor, the business started making the nets nearly three years ago and is likely to add 1,000 more jobs within the next year.

”They’re in the process of building a real company town there,” Ms. Novogratz said.

Ms. Novogratz is not an outsourcing executive at a multinational company. Rather, she is the chief executive of the Acumen Fund, a philanthropic start-up based in New York that uses donations to make equity investments and loans in both for-profit and nonprofit companies in impoverished countries. One of the stars of her small portfolio is the bed-netting maker, A to Z Manufacturing, a family-owned company in Tanzania — a country where 80 percent of the population makes less than $2 a day.

. . .

”To put it in the baldest possible terms, the more sweatshops the better,” said William Easterly, professor of economics at New York University and author of ”The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good.” Professor Easterly is not advocating the deliberate creation of workplaces with miserable conditions. ”As you increase the number of factories demanding labor, wages will be driven up,” he said, and eventually such factories will not be sweatshops.

Ms. Novogratz says it can be difficult to tell well-off, philanthropy-minded Westerners that what Africa really needs is more $2-a-day jobs. But when they understand the alternatives, she said, such concerns tend to melt away. Before they found work at the netting factory in Tanzania, for example, many of the women were street vendors or domestic workers and earned less than $1 a day. A to Z’s wages place the women in Tanzania’s top quartile of earners, Ms. Novogratz said.

For the full commentary, see:

DANIEL GROSS. "ECONOMIC VIEW; Fighting Poverty With $2-a-Day Jobs." The New York Times Section 3, (Sunday, July 16, 2006): 4.

Life Has Improved; And Can Continue to Improve

Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited below.

(p. 1) New research from around the world has begun to reveal a picture of humans today that is so different from what it was in the past that scientists say they are startled. Over the past 100 years, says one researcher, Robert W. Fogel of the University of Chicago, humans in the industrialized world have undergone “a form of evolution that is unique not only to humankind, but unique among the 7,000 or so generations of humans who have ever inhabited the earth.”

. . .

(p. 19) . . . stressful occupations added to the burden on the body.

People would work until they died or were so disabled that they could not continue, Dr. Fogel said. “In 1890, nearly everyone died on the job, and if they lived long enough not to die on the job, the average age of retirement was 85,” he said. Now the average age is 62.

A century ago, most people were farmers, laborers or artisans who were exposed constantly to dust and fumes, Dr. Costa said. “I think there is just this long-term scarring.”

For the full story, see:

Kolata, Gina. "The New Age; Older and Better; So Big and Healthy Grandpa Wouldn’t Even Know You." The New York Times, Section 1 (Sunday, July 30, 2006): 1 & 18-19.

Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited above.

Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited above. Source of book image: http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521808782

Fogel’s book is a primary academic source for much of what is interesting in the New York Times article. Fogel predicts that if we don’t screw things up, half of today’s college students will live to be 100. He shows that academics in the past have consistently and significantly underestimated the maximum lifespans that would be attainable in the future.

The full reference for the Fogel book is:

Fogel, Robert William. The Escape from Hunger and Premature Death, 1700-2100, Cambridge Studies in Population, Economy and Society in Past Time. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.