Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…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
  • “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
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

Macro Roundup


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

Friday, March 4, 2016

AI Summary. The authors argue mismeasurement does not explain the U.S. productivity slowdown since 2004, which has left output about $2.7tn below prior trends. They note the slowdown appears across many countries regardless of information-technology intensity, and estimates of consumer surplus from digital technologies are far smaller than the missing output.

Chad Syverson National Bureau of Economic Research
Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

The U.S. productivity slowdown since 2004 has resulted in a $2.7tn gap, with mismeasurement not accounting for this shortfall.

Does mismeasurement explain the U.S. productivity slowdown?

Core argument: The U.S. productivity slowdown since 2004 has opened a $2.7tn gap relative to expected trends, a shortfall the authors argue mismeasurement does not explain.

The U.S. productivity slowdown since 2004 has resulted in a $2.7tn gap compared to expected trends, and mismeasurement does not account for this shortfall. The slowdown is evident across numerous countries, unrelated to their ICT consumption or production intensities. Estimates of surplus from digital technologies are significantly less than the missing output, with the largest being less than one-third of the mismeasured GDP. Properly measured output and productivity growth in ICT industries would need to be multiples of current data if mismeasurement were a factor. Additionally, the trend of higher gross domestic income over GDP, driven by high capital income, predates the slowdown, further challenging the mismeasurement hypothesis.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The U.S. productivity slowdown since 2004 has opened a $2.7tn gap relative to expected trends, a shortfall the authors argue mismeasurement does not explain.
  2. Estimates of surplus from digital technologies fall well short of the missing output, with the largest under one-third of the allegedly mismeasured GDP.
  3. The productivity slowdown appears across many countries regardless of their ICT consumption or production intensities, and the rising ratio of gross domestic income to GDP, driven by high capital income, predates the slowdown.

right in Robert Gordon's wheelhouse. new paper finds the productivity slowdown is real, not a function of our measures failing to capture consumer surplus. Syverson estimate the the productivity slowdown since 2004 has left a 2.7 trillion gap compared to where we otherwise would be had trends continued.

"... First, the productivity slowdown has occurred in dozens of countries, and its size is unrelated to measures of the countries’ consumption or production intensities of information and communication technologies (ICTs, the type of goods most often cited as sources of mismeasurement). Second, estimates from the existing research literature of the surplus created by internet-linked digital technologies fall far short of the $2.7 trillion or more of "missing output" resulting from the productivity growth slowdown. The largest—by some distance—is less than one-third of the purportedly mismeasured GDP. Third, if measurement problems were to account for even a modest share of this missing output,the properly measured output and productivity growth rates of industries that produce and service ICTs would have to have been multiples of their measured growth in the data. Fourth, while measured gross domestic income has been on average higher than measured gross domestic product since 2004—perhaps indicating workers are being paid to make products that are given away for free or at highly discounted prices—this trend actually began before the productivity slowdown and moreover reflects unusually high capital income rather than labor income (i.e., profits are unusually high). In combination, these complementary facets of evidence suggest that the reasonable prima facie case for the mismeasurement hypothesis faces real hurdles when confronted with the data...."

Chad Syverson, "Challenges to Mismeasurement Explanations for the U.S. Productivity Slowdown," National Bureau of Economic Research, February 2016, http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/chad.syverson/research/productivityslowdown.pdf
--