Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
  • “…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
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “Unintended Consequences is far smarter and more thought-provoking than most economics written for the general public” - Greg Mankiw, Harvard University, Former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

Macro Roundup


Wednesday, February 24, 2016

AI Summary. The federal financial safety net of government guarantees and insurance programs is estimated to cover $25tn in financial assets, a substantial share of the U.S. financial system. Its coverage extends beyond traditional banks to non-bank financial entities, raising questions about the balance between risk mitigation and market discipline.

John Walter Economic Quarterly
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

The federal financial safety net has expanded significantly, covering $25tn in financial assets, a substantial portion of the U.S. financial system.

How large has the federal financial safety net grown?

Core argument: The federal financial safety net is estimated to cover $25tn in financial assets, a substantial portion of the U.S. financial system.

The federal financial safety net has expanded significantly, with its size estimated to cover $25tn in financial assets, representing a substantial portion of the U.S. financial system. This expansion is driven by government guarantees and insurance programs, which have grown to encompass a wide range of financial institutions and products. The safety net's growth reflects increased federal intervention aimed at stabilizing the economy and preventing systemic risks. As of 2013, the safety net's coverage includes not only traditional banking institutions but also non-bank financial entities, highlighting the government's broader role in safeguarding financial stability. This expansion raises important considerations for policymakers regarding the balance between risk mitigation and market discipline, as well as the potential fiscal implications of such extensive guarantees.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The federal financial safety net is estimated to cover $25tn in financial assets, a substantial portion of the U.S. financial system.
  2. Government guarantees and insurance programs have expanded the safety net beyond traditional banking institutions to non-bank financial entities and a wide range of financial products.
  3. The scale of federal guarantees raises considerations for policymakers about the balance between risk mitigation and market discipline, along with the potential fiscal implications of such extensive coverage.

Malysheva, Nadezhda and John Walter, "How Large Has the Federal Financial Safety Net Become? (Revised February 2013)"Economic Quarterly, 2010. Available at:https://www.richmondfed.org/-/media/richmondfedorg/publications/research/working_papers/2010/pdf/wp10-03r.pdf

Tuesday, March 1, 2016

AI Summary. Children raised by single parents experience more family instability and complexity and show more behavior problems than children raised by both parents. They are also less likely to complete high school or attend college.

Sara McLanahan Education Next
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

Children of single parents face more family instability & complexity, leading to increased behavior problems. They’re less likely to complete high school or attend college, impacting GDP growth & increasing reliance on social welfare programs.

Do children raised by single parents face worse behavioral and educational outcomes?

Core argument: McLanahan and Jencks find that children of single parents experience more family instability and complexity, leading to increased behavior problems relative to children raised by both parents.

Children of single parents face more family instability and complexity, leading to increased behavior problems compared to those raised by both parents. This demographic is statistically less likely to complete high school or attend college, which can have long-term economic implications. The lack of educational attainment among these children may contribute to a less skilled workforce, potentially impacting GDP growth and increasing reliance on social welfare programs. As policymakers consider strategies to support single-parent families, addressing educational disparities and behavioral issues could mitigate future economic challenges and improve overall societal outcomes.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. McLanahan and Jencks find that children of single parents experience more family instability and complexity, leading to increased behavior problems relative to children raised by both parents.
  2. Children raised by single parents are statistically less likely to complete high school or attend college, an educational gap with long-term economic implications.
  3. Addressing educational disparities and behavioral problems among children of single-parent families could mitigate future economic challenges and improve societal outcomes.

Jencks


"... On the one hand, growing up without both biological parents is clearly associated with worse average outcomes for children than growing up with them. Specifically, children growing up with a single mother are exposed to more family instability and complexity, they have more behavior problems, and they are less likely to finish high school or attend college than children raised by both of their parents...."

Sara McLanahan and Christopher Jencks, "Was Moynihan Right?" Education Next, Spring 2015.http://educationnext.org/was-moynihan-right/

AI Summary. Immigrants in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have lower labor force participation than natives: 61% vs 76% in Norway, 64% vs 82% in Sweden, and 58% vs 78% in Denmark, with higher immigrant unemployment as well. These gaps leave labor potential underused, weighing on economic output and public welfare systems.

Silje Vatne Pettersen and Lars Østby Samfunnsspeilet
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

Immigrants in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark face significant integration challenges, with lower labor force participation rates compared to natives. In Norway, immigrant LFP is 61%, vs 76% for natives.

Do Nordic immigrants participate in the labor force less than natives?

Core argument: Denmark's immigrant labor force participation rate is 58%, compared with 78% for natives, a gap of 20 percentage points.

The integration of immigrants in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark remains a significant challenge, with data indicating lower labor force participation (LFP) rates among immigrants compared to native populations. In Norway, the LFP rate for immigrants is 61%, compared to 76% for natives. Sweden reports a similar trend, with immigrant LFP at 64% versus 82% for natives. Denmark shows a gap as well, with immigrant LFP at 58% compared to 78% for natives. These disparities contribute to economic inefficiencies and social tensions, as underutilized labor potential impacts GDP growth and public welfare systems. The unemployment rate among immigrants is also notably higher, exacerbating the economic divide. Addressing these integration issues is crucial for policymakers aiming to harness the full economic potential of immigrant populations and ensure sustainable economic growth in these Nordic countries.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Denmark's immigrant labor force participation rate is 58%, compared with 78% for natives, a gap of 20 percentage points.
  2. Sweden's immigrant labor force participation stands at 64% against 82% for natives, while Norway's is 61% against 76%, shortfalls of 18 and 15 percentage points.
  3. Unemployment among immigrants in Norway, Sweden, and Denmark runs higher than among natives, and the resulting underutilized labor potential weighs on GDP growth and public welfare systems.

Official government research, published prior to the current crisis. Supports both lack of integration cites

Pettersen, Silje Vatne and Lars Ostby, "Immigrants in Norway, Sweden and Denmark,"Samfunnsspeilet, May 2013.https://www.ssb.no/en/befolkning/artikler-og-publikasjoner/immigrants-in-norway-sweden-and-denmark