Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

Macro Roundup


Monday, October 1, 2012

AI Summary. Social Security Administration data show the share of workers receiving disability benefits rose from 1 in 35 in 1992 to 1 in 16, totaling 8.7m disabled workers.

SSA Staff Social Security Administation
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

Disabled workers have risen from 1 in 35 in 1992 to 1 in 16 today, totaling 8.7m workers. @EnjoyedlunchTwo @EnjoyedlunchTwo attachments on disability.

Has the share of workers receiving disability benefits risen sharply?

Core argument: Social Security Administration data show disabled workers rose from 1 in 35 workers in 1992 to 1 in 16 today, totaling 8.7m disabled workers.

The number of disabled workers has significantly increased, with data from the Social Security Administration indicating a rise from 1 in 35 workers in 1992 to 1 in 16 today, totaling 8.7m disabled workers. This shift highlights a growing economic challenge as the proportion of disabled individuals in the workforce has more than doubled over the past three decades. The implications of this trend are profound, affecting labor force participation rates and potentially increasing the financial burden on social security systems. As policymakers and economists analyze these statistics, it becomes crucial to consider the underlying factors contributing to this rise and to develop strategies that address both the economic and social dimensions of disability in the workforce.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Social Security Administration data show disabled workers rose from 1 in 35 workers in 1992 to 1 in 16 today, totaling 8.7m disabled workers.
  2. The proportion of disabled individuals in the workforce has more than doubled over three decades, with implications for labor force participation rates.

Two attachments on disability. 8.7mm disabled workers according to the social security administration. from 1:35 workers in ’92 to 1:16 today.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/dibStat.html

Underneath it all, you really just seek to disincentivize births by disconnecting unwed mothers from their peers more aggressively than the underlying economic incentives do it naturally in Sweden and the US (small group in Sweden, big and growing group in the US). Perhaps you can wage the dog by its tail, but it seems horribly naïve to me given the scale of the problem. In fact, I would say that the naivety underlying your thinking is the very thing that caused our problem in the first place. To change the culture gradually, you need to change the economic incentives to those of your Swedish middleclass sister the cost of having a baby needs to be enormous relative to the alternative--probably even greater incentives are needed now that the “unwed” culture incentivizes rather than discourages unwed motherhood.

Sweden can offer great benefits because the differential is still not large enough to incentivize middleclass girls like your sister to have children. Young women like your sister don’t have babies no matter the incentives, so young Swedish women who have unwed babies end up disconnected from the vast majority of their peers. Demographics overpower incentives and create a culture that allows them to offer benefits without it inducing nearly as many births. The opposite is the case in the US, the demographics induce more births for a given level of incentives. Girls drop out of school and have babies partly to be with their peers. It’s so much easier to be destructive rather than constructive. That’s why destructive social behaviors like smoking, tattoos and having out-of-wedlock kids are so contagious.

Here’s my concern with your argument. When you misdiagnose the problem as culture alone (independent of the effect of incentives—or disincentives as the case may be—on different IQs), it leaves open the possibility that we could do what works in Sweden (and with your sister) and enjoy the same result—that we could offer good benefits to unwed mothers and unwed births wouldn’t rise. From my perspective, you’re wagging the dog by the tail. It’s exactly what led to the problem in the first place—blindness and wishful thinking.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2903645/posts

Sunday, December 29, 2013

AI Summary. Demographic aging is projected to shrink the share of working-age Americans and weigh on productivity, while top income brackets capture a larger share of economic gains. Absent policy responses such as greater investment in education and workforce development, median income is projected to stagnate or decline.

Bill Steele Cornell Chronicle
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

Demographic shifts are poised to significantly impact median income levels in the U.S., with projections indicating a decline in the average American’s income position. @BillSteele

Will an aging population push median American incomes lower?

Core argument: Demographic shifts in the U.S., including an aging population and a shrinking share of working-age individuals, are projected to lower the average American's income position and reduce overall economic productivity.

Demographic shifts are poised to significantly impact median income levels in the U.S., with projections indicating a decline in the average American's income position. As the population ages, the proportion of working-age individuals is expected to decrease, leading to a potential reduction in overall economic productivity. This demographic trend is compounded by a growing income disparity, where the top income brackets continue to capture a larger share of economic gains. The combination of these factors suggests that without policy interventions, such as increased investment in education and workforce development, the median income may stagnate or decline. This shift could have broad implications for consumer spending, economic growth, and social stability, necessitating strategic planning from policymakers and business leaders to mitigate potential negative outcomes.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Demographic shifts in the U.S., including an aging population and a shrinking share of working-age individuals, are projected to lower the average American's income position and reduce overall economic productivity.
  2. Growing income disparity, with top income brackets capturing a larger share of economic gains, compounds demographic pressure on median income, which may stagnate or decline absent policy interventions such as investment in education and workforce development.
  3. A stagnating or declining median income could carry implications for consumer spending, economic growth, and social stability, calling for strategic planning from policymakers and business leaders.

Bill Steele, 'Average American' will slide down income scale, Cornell Chronicle, August 29, 2013, http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2013/08/average-american-will-slide-down-income-scale