Economics – Page 248 – artdiamondblog.com

German Brain Drain

Engineer Benedikt Thoma is moving his family to Canada from Germany for a brighter future. Source of photo: online verion of the NYT article cited below.

ESCHBORN, Germany, Feb. 3 — Benedikt Thoma recalls the moment he began to think seriously about leaving Germany. It was in 2004, at a New Year’s Day reception in nearby Frankfurt, and the guest speaker, a prominent politician, was lamenting the fact that every year thousands of educated Germans turn their backs on their homeland.

“That struck me like a bolt of lightning,” said Mr. Thoma, 44, an engineer then running his family’s elevator company. “I asked myself, ‘Why should I stay here when the future is brighter someplace else?’ ”

In December, as his work with the company became an intolerable grind because of labor disputes, Mr. Thoma quit and made plans to move to Canada. In its wide-open spaces he hopes to find the future that he says is dwindling at home. As soon as he lands a job, Mr. Thoma, his wife, Petra, and their two teenage sons will join the ranks of Germany’s emigrants.

There has been a steady exodus over the years, but it has recently become Topic A in a land already saddled with one of the most rapidly aging and shrinking populations of any Western nation. With evidence that more professionals are leaving now than in past years, politicians and business executives warn about the loss of their country’s best and brightest.

. . .

. . . , there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that Germany has become less attractive for people in fields like medicine, academic research and engineering. Those who leave cite chronic unemployment, a rigid labor market, stifling bureaucracy, high taxes and the plodding economy — which, though better recently, still lags behind that of the United States.

. . .

In Mr. Thoma’s view, the root of the problem is [that] . . . Germany, . . . , has a “blockage” in its society.

“Germans are so complacent,” he said, sitting at the dining table in his neat-as-a-pin home here. “They don’t want to change anything. Everything is discussed endlessly without ever reaching a solution.”

As an example he cites the stalemate between his family’s firm and its 89 employees. After the firm became unionized, he said, the two sides began bickering over wages and working conditions.

With much of his 80-hour workweeks eaten up by those disputes, Mr. Thoma said he had developed high blood pressure and other ailments. He told his brothers he was burned out and ready to leave.

For the full story, see:

MARK LANDLER. "Germany Agonizes Over a Brain Drain." The New York Times (Tues., February 6, 2007): A10.

(Note: ellipses added.)

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

Guns Deter Crime

Knoxville, Tenn.

IT’S a phenomenon that gives the term “gun control” a whole new meaning: community ordinances that encourage citizens to own guns.

Last month, Greenleaf, Idaho, adopted Ordinance 208, calling for its citizens to own guns and keep them ready in their homes in case of emergency. It’s not a response to high crime rates. As The Associated Press reported, “Greenleaf doesn’t really have crime … the most violent offense reported in the past two years was a fist fight.” Rather, it’s a statement about preparedness in the event of an emergency, and an effort to promote a culture of self-reliance.

. . .

Criminals, unsurprisingly, would rather break into a house where they aren’t at risk of being shot. As David Kopel noted in a 2001 article in The Arizona Law Review, burglars report that they try to avoid homes where armed residents are likely to be present. We see this phenomenon internationally, too, with the United States having a lower proportion of “hot” burglaries — break-ins where the burglars know the home to be occupied — than countries with restrictive gun laws.

Likewise, in the event of disasters that leave law enforcement overwhelmed, armed citizens can play an important role in stanching crime. Armed neighborhood watches deterred looting in parts of Houston and New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

For the full commentary, see:

GLENN REYNOLDS. "A Rifle in Every Pot." The New York Times (Tues., January 16, 2007): A31.

Glenn Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee, and is the blogger of Instapundit.com. In 2006, he published:

Reynolds, Glenn. An Army of Davids: How Markets and Technology Empower Ordinary People to Beat Big Media, Big Government, and Other Goliaths. Nashville, TN: Nelson Current, 2006.

Source of book image: http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/1595550542.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1136930360_.jpg

Labor is “Responsible for the Consequences of Their Choice”

An early free-market economist claims that in a free-market economy, a worker’s happiness depends mainly on her own actions:

But whenever property is secure, industry free, and the public burdens moderate, the happiness or misery of the labouring classes depends almost wholly on themselves. Government has there done for them all that it should, and all in truth that it can do. It has given them security and freedom. But the use or abuse of these inestimable advantages is their own affair. They may be either provident or improvident, industrious or idle; and being free to choose, they are alone responsible for the consequences of their choice.

The passage was brought to my attention by an HES Posting from Michael Perelman. The thread was continued by Torsten Schmidt, and the final information on the pages where the passage may be found, was added by Masazumi Wakatabe.

The reference for the source of the passage is:

McCulloch, J.R. A Treatise on the Circumstances which Determine the Rate of Wages and the Condition of the Labouring Classes, second edition, corrected and improved, 1854, 16-17.

Paying for Congestion “with Time, Unreliability, Psychological Hell”

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

Congestion pricing "is a lot cheaper than the way we’re paying now … with time, unreliability, psychological hell," said Tyler Duvall, DOT’s assistant secretary for policy.

. . .

Even a 5% reduction in traffic jams can increase traffic speeds by as much as 50%, says Mr. Duvall. DOT officials figure a typical big-city traffic jam can be cleared with tolls of as little as $2 to $2.50 a day, if all lanes on a big highway are charged. But on some Southern California highways where fees are charged only for the former high-occupancy lanes, prices at the peak of rush hour have reached $8.50.

Congestion pricing has already taken hold in Europe, and the success of a congestion pricing system for London’s roads three years ago motivated U.S. officials and major businesses to consider the idea. Voters in Stockholm approved a similar plan in September, after a test run during the summer.

For the full story, see:

JOHN D. MCKINNON. "Bush Plays Traffic Cop in Budget Request; President Suggests ‘Congestion’ Tolls To Ease Rush Hour." The Wall Street Journal (Mon., February 5, 2007): A6.

(Note: the ellipsis in the Duvall quote was in the original; the other ellipsis was added.)

Union Decline Continues in United States

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

Union membership dropped sharply last year in the United States, as the percentage of manufacturing workers in unions fell below the percentage of American workers in unions for the first time in modern history.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Thursday that union membership fell by 326,000 in 2006, to 15.4 million workers, bringing the percentage of employees in unions to 12 percent, down from 12.5 percent in 2005. Those figures are down from 20 percent in 1983 and from 35 percent in the 1950s.

Work force experts said the decline in union membership was caused by large-scale layoffs and buyouts in the auto industry and other manufacturing industries, together with the labor movement’s difficulties in organizing nonunion workers fast enough to offset those losses.

For the full story, see:

STEVEN GREENHOUSE. "Sharp Decline in Union Members in ’06." The New York Times (Fri., January 26, 2007): A11.

Fed Chairman Bernanke’s Omaha Speech

Bernanke in Omaha addressing the Chamber of Commerce (left) and after receiving a plaque officially appointing him as an "admiral" of the Nebraska Navy (right, ha, ha). Source of the left photo: http://www.omaha.com/neo-images/photos/large/ap-nenh10102061909.jpg Source of the right photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

Last week, on 2/6/07, I attended a large Chamber of Commerce luncheon at which Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke was the featured speaker. The talk was subtle and restrained, but interesting. Apparently it was one of the first speeches by Bernanke, since becoming chair, to address an economic issue broader than the macro policy issues that the fed usually addresses. The headlines in the Omaha World-Herald and the Wall Street Journal missed the main point, I think.

The main point was not to criticize the inequality of the United States economy, but to praise its dynamism. He pointed out the extent to which living standards have improved as a result of that dynamism. And he wanted mainly to suggest that when we adopt policies aimed at reducing inequality, we be careful to be sure that the policies do not have the unintended consequence of reducing the dynamism.

In particular, he suggested that much of the inequality was driven by an increasing skill premium, and that the most constructive way to reduce inequality would be to reduce the skill premium by increasing the supply of skilled labor. This implies that individuals, and government, invest in increasing skills through increased access to community colleges, universities, online education, and the like.

For the full NYT article, see:

"Bernanke Suggests How to Narrow Wage Gap." The New York Times (Weds., February 7, 2007): C13.

For the full WSJ article, see:

DAVID WESSEL. "Fed Chief Warns of Widening Inequality; Bernanke Urges Steps That Avoid Harm to Economy." The Wall Street Journal (Weds., February 7, 2007): A6.

For the full Omaha World-Herald article, see:

STEVE JORDON. "Fed chief says income gap poses problems." Omaha World-Herald (Wednesday, February 7, 2007): 1D & 2D.

(Note: the online version of the article had the slightly different title "Growing income gap poses problems, Fed chief says" and is dated 2/6/07. The article may have first appeared in the paper’s evening edition on 2/6/07. My copy was the morning edition of 2/7/07.)

For the text of Bernanke’s "The Level and Distrubution of Economic Well-Being" presentation, see: http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/Speeches/2007/20070206/default.htm

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

Milton Friedman’s School Vouchers Pass Utah Senate

I received an email mailing yesterday (2/9/07) from Robert Fanger, who is the Communications Director of the Milton and Rose Friedman Foundation. He wrote: "By a vote of 19 to 10, the Utah Senate passed the universal school voucher bill this afternoon."

On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial on the issue that is excerpted below:

Proving that the best reforms often pass by the slimmest of margins, Utah’s house voted 38-37 late last week to create a state-wide voucher program that will allow students to escape failing public schools.

Union opponents can be expected to mount a furious assault in the state senate, and then head to court. But the senate is likely to pass the reform supported by GOP Governor Jon Huntsman Jr., so Utah may soon become the first state with a universal school choice plan. It would offer students who attend private K-12 schools from $500 to $3,000 in tuition reimbursement based on family income.

Meanwhile, South Carolina could be next. Legislation is now being drafted to allow nearly 200,000 poor students to opt out of failing public schools by giving them up to $4,500 a year to spend on private school tuition. Middle class parents would be eligible for a $1,000 tax credit.

Reference for editorial:

"Choice Advances." The Wall Street Journal (Weds., February 7, 2007): A14.

Real-Time Pricing Results in More Efficient Electricity Generation

Real-time electricity meters in a building in Central Park West behind resident Peter Funk, Jr. Source of photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

The article excerpted below gets some of the story right. It should emphasize more that the main benefit from real-time pricing would be that it would reduce the peak load. Generation plants need to be built to handle peak-load. The last generating plants to go on line are the least efficient. if the need for such inefficient, peak-load, plants can be reduced, the costs of generating electricity can be enormously reduced.

There is talk of market competition in the states that have deregulated their electric utility industries. But it should be remembered that even where most deregulated, the result is a long way from a paradigmatic free market. The main point is hinted at in the article below. The ultimate suppliers of electricity to the home remain government-protected monopolies.

If we wanted a truly free market, maybe we should actually allow multple companies to connect to homes, the way we allow multiple television and internet companies to connect their cables to the home. Then some low-cost Wal-Mart of electricty would arise, and blow the stick-in-the-muds away.

(p A1) Ten times last year, Judi Kinch, a geologist, got e-mail messages telling her that the next afternoon any electricity used at her Chicago apartment would be particularly expensive because hot, steamy weather was increasing demand for power.

Each time, she and her husband would turn down the air-conditioners — sometimes shutting one of them off — and let the dinner dishes sit in the washer until prices fell back late at night.

Most people are not aware that electricity prices fluctuate widely throughout the day, let alone exactly how much they pay at the moment they flip a switch. But Ms. Kinch and her husband are among the 1,100 Chicago residents who belong to the Community Energy Cooperative, a pilot project to encourage energy conservation, and this puts them among the rare few who are able to save money by shifting their use of power.

Just as cellphone customers delay personal calls until they become free at night and on weekends, and just as millions of people fly at less popular times because air fares are lower, people who know the price of electricity at any given moment can cut back when prices are high and use more when prices are low. Partici-(p. A14)pants in the Community Energy Cooperative program, for example, can check a Web site that tells them, hour by hour, how much their electricity costs; they get e-mail alerts when the price is set to rise above 20 cents a kilowatt-hour.

If just a fraction of all Americans had this information and could adjust their power use accordingly, the savings would be huge. Consumers would save nearly $23 billion a year if they shifted just 7 percent of their usage during peak periods to less costly times, research at Carnegie Mellon University indicates. That is the equivalent of the entire nation getting a free month of power every year.

. . .

Under either the traditional system of utility regulation, with prices set by government, or in the competitive business now in half the states, companies that generate and distribute power have little or no incentive to supply customers with hourly meters, which can cut into their profits.

Meters that encourage people to reduce demand at peak hours will translate to less need for power plants — particularly ones that are only called into service during streaks of hot or cold weather.

In states where rates are still regulated, utilities earn a virtually guaranteed profit on their generating stations. Even if a power plant runs only one hour a year, the utility earns a healthy return on its cost.

In a competitive market, it is the spikes in demand that cause prices to soar for brief periods. Flattening out the peaks would be disastrous for some power plant owners, which could go bankrupt if the profit they get from peak prices were to ebb significantly.

. . .

The smart metering programs are not new, but their continued rarity speaks in part to the success of power-generating companies in protecting their profit models. Some utilities did install meters in a small number of homes as early as three decades ago, pushed by the environmental movement and a spike in energy prices.

For the full story, see:

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON. "Taking Control Of Electric Bill, Hour by Hour." The New York Times (Mon., January 8, 2007): A1 & A14.

(Note: ellipses added.)

Graph showing the range of variation in hourly electricity rates in different months. Source of graphic: online version of the NYT article cited above.

Plastic Pipes Need Less Labor, So Unions Oppose

Residential plastic pipe. Source of photo: http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=46

(p. D1) The City of Omaha is considering allowing an alternative to copper pipes in residential plumbing, a move the local builders association says could keep new home prices from rising so fast.

. . .

(p. D2) "Omaha is kind of unique in not allowing plastic. It’s kind of an isolated pocket," said Blas Hernandez, Papillion’s chief building official, who also has worked in the Kansas City, Denver, upstate New York and central Nebraska areas.

Mike Lipke, western regional manager for FlowGuard Gold CPVC pipes, agreed. He said Omaha and Chicago stand out among Midwestern cities for not allowing plastic water pipes.

Several people with long tenure in the building industry said they believe Omaha has lagged in adoption of plastics because the material is less labor-intensive to install and organized labor has fought to protect work for its members.

Stephen Andersen, business manager for the 470-member Omaha Plumbers Local 16, said he doesn’t think it’s necessarily faster to install plastic pipes, and he personally favors copper "because it’s such a good product, a proven product."

. . .

With the housing market slowed and copper prices still high, now may be the time to make affordability the most important consideration, said Paul Frazier, president of the Frazier Co. and a member of the Metro Omaha Builders Association’s board.

"MOBA is fully behind" the proposed change, President Rocky Goodwin said. Frazier represented MOBA in discussions with the Omaha Plumbing Board.

"We’re long overdue for this," Frazier said. "Anything that holds costs down while doing as good or better job is a good thing.

. . .

Lipke, who sells CPVC, said all the model codes and all 50 states approve the use of plastic and plastic has captured two-thirds of the market.

. . .

"People might try it because it’s less money, but they won’t keep using it if it doesn’t work," Lipke said. "It’s a good product, and it certainly shouldn’t be banned the way it is in Omaha."

For the full story, see:

DEBORAH SHANAHAN. "Omaha may lift ban on residential plastic pipe." Omaha World-Herald (Wednesday, January 24, 2007): D1 & D2.

(Note: ellipses added.)

[Joseph Schumpeter was born on February 8, 1883.]

The Difference Between Being a University President and Being a Cabinet Officer

At a dinner last week to announce the winner of the business book of the year award, Lawrence H. Summers, the former Treasury secretary, poked fun at his tenure as the president of Harvard. . . .

Specifically, he said he was woefully naïve when he had been first asked to describe the difference between being a university president and being a cabinet officer. ”I guess I didn’t get it right in the answer I gave in my first year or two,” he said, ”because I used to say, ‘Well, in Washington, it’s so political; there’s organized opposition to everything.’ ”

For the full story, see:

JANE L. LEVERE. "OPENERS: SUITS; HARVARD EDUCATION." The New York Times, Section 3 (Sun., October 29, 2006): 2.

(Note: ellipsis added.)

Schumpeterian Alan Greenspan Receives Second Richest Book Advance Ever Paid

Why is this man smiling? (Alan Greenspan has reason to grin.) Source of photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

I believe that the market for economists is imperfectly competitive, since the supply and demand for academics is highly regulated by governmental and quasi-governmental institutions. But it is interesting that the second highest book advance ever paid is going to Alan Greenspan. Greenspan is a practical, eclectic, economist who believes that Schumpeter’s process of creative destruction is important for understanding the workings of a capitalist economy.

(p. C1) Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, has agreed to sell his memoir for an advance of more than $8.5 million, according to people involved in the negotiations, making a deal that appears to give him the second-largest advance ever paid for a nonfiction book.

. . .

(p. C8) Mr. Greenspan’s advance ranks second only to the more than $10 million paid to former President Bill Clinton for his memoir, "My Life," which was published in June 2004. Pope John Paul II received an advance of $8.5 million in 1994 for his book, "Crossing the Threshold of Hope," and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton received an $8 million advance for her memoir, "Living History," published in 2003.

For the full story, see:

EDWARD WYATT. "Greenspan’s Book Deal Is Said to Be Among the Richest." The New York Times (Weds., March 8, 2006): C1 & C8.