Archive for October, 2008

Loads of good data

Friday, October 10th, 2008

Its interesting to see the IT industry’s reaction to the financial mess because technology expenditures are really sensitive to macroeconomic conditions1. This is a presentation a large venture capital firm gave its portfolio companies yesterday; lots of interesting data:

(h/t VentureBeat)

  1. This is one of those facts that I just know… I’m having a terrible time tracking down data to support this contention, though. The best I can do is to point at technology stocks’ high betas. []

A bold new health insurance proposal

Friday, October 10th, 2008

(h/t Prof. Whitman)

More excess demand for spot analysis

Wednesday, October 8th, 2008

Prof. Mankiw:

The question for the moment is, How can we get capital back into the financial system? Ideally, it would be great if more Warren Buffetts would step up to the plate and recapitalize financial firms with private money. Unfortunately, that might not happen fast enough to prevent a major economic downturn. (emph added)

What does he mean by “not happen fast enough”?

My willingness to pay for this information is the money equivalent of 5 minutes of reading time plus a small probability that I’ll glance at the ads on your site. Of course, public praise will be lavished upon you if you answer. Also, I’ll pay extra if your answer has the the term “Walrasian Auctioneer” in it.

Billers and Players

Thursday, October 2nd, 2008

This1 is brilliant:

A final trend that promotes income inequality is that more Americans may be engaging in a kind of gambling behavior in their choice of occupation. They are increasingly choosing to play in winners-take-most tournaments, such as the contest to build the leading Internet search engine. For every Sergey Brin, there were thousands of software engineers who played in the search-engine contest and lost.

As best-selling writer and investor Nassim Nicholas Taleb points out in The Black Swan, safe occupations are those where the worker is paid a fixed amount per unit of time. An accountant or a nurse is not going to become extremely rich or extremely poor; they could be called “billers,” because they bill for their time. On the other hand, a professional singer or a software entrepreneur is playing in a winners-take-most tournament. The difference in talent between an international pop star and an unknown lounge singer may actually be quite small. However, the nature of these fields is that the difference in rewards can be enormous. People who choose these sorts of occupations could be called “players.”

Winners-take-most tournaments widen the distribution of income. First, they create a gap between the winning players and ordinary billers. Sergey Brin could have earned a nice salary writing software for Microsoft or for Bank of America, but that would not have made him a billionaire.

Second, winners-take-most tournaments lure people from the security of earning salaries as billers. People who quit their day jobs—or graduates who delay taking one—to “pursue their dream” often end up on the lower end of the income distribution, at least until they “sell out” and join the working drudges. Of course, some of them actually succeed in escaping the cubicle world. Back in the 1990s, one of us (Kling) did just that by leaving a stable job as a biller at a large financial services firm and founding a start-up technology business.

Several factors have made it a lot easier to quit as a biller in order to take a fling at being a player. The Internet is one. As writer Daniel Pink has noted, the low cost of creating a business on the Web has fulfilled Karl Marx’s dream—an ordinary worker can now own the means of production.

What’s more, technological progress is most likely speeding up, leading to more of what Joseph Schumpeter called “creative destruction.” Many jobs destroyed in a modern economy are for billers, which force them to change and in some cases prompts them to try their hand at entrepreneurial, player-type enterprises.

Lots of the opportunities created during this dynamic process are for players. We are seeing greater numbers of successful players, and the biggest winners, like Sergey Brin, are taking in larger rewards than ever.

The supply of players also may be increasing. The change in marital patterns can facilitate this. With fewer households dependent on a single income, it is possible for one spouse to try being a player, while the other spouse remains a biller. The country’s relative level of wealth and the sheer size of its middle class also play a role. In today’s America both parents may remain billers, but their recent college graduate may become a player, knowing that the parents can provide support until the gamble pays off or the humbled child takes a regular job. A few generations ago, entertaining such a thought was a luxury as many parents needed their child to take a stable job to support their retirement.

  1. Chrome won’t load that page. No problems in Firefox, though. []

Pro-bailout, anti-geek, greedy, not fearful

Thursday, October 2nd, 2008

Warren Buffet (interview with Charlie Rose). Please watch the whole thing; Mr. Buffet is a character.

Speaking of transparent updating, how should I update my views of the likelihood of success of the bailout based on this endorsement by Buffet? He has a good track record and he’s obviously more knowledgeable than me on these subjects, but he will also gain personally from a bailout. He’s not making a completely objective assessment of the bailout, so to what extent do I ignore what he’s saying? Should people update their beliefs at all based on non-objective opinions (which is, like, all opinions)?

PS – Mr. Buffet also touches on his views of taxes that were such an issue a couple months ago (starting at about 45 minutes).

PPS – Mr. Buffet says eve he is not big enough to make some of the deals that need to be done. So the government isn’t addressing market failure… its just the only player that’s big enough.

/. Africa facts of the day

Wednesday, October 1st, 2008