Wednesday, June 7, 2017

The State of Sooner Football

About nine months ago I began writing this post in rough form following a pair of painful and disappointing losses to begin the 2016 Sooner football season. I refined it a bit about midway through the season, but as prospects were improving, I put it back on the shelf not wanting to post something that seemed too critical during a season-comeback effort. The post is more about the long run trend than the short run noise (good or bad). With today's news it seems appropriate to consider the thought experiment...

Bob Stoops has chosen to retire. His contributions to OU have been tremendous. I am and always have been a very strong fan and supporter of Stoops--at times perhaps an apologist. I will miss him being on my team's sideline. He reawakened The Monster. He was an innovator. On the field and off the field he pursued and achieved excellence. Looking back at his tenure it is easy to pine for what could have been. But the fair reflection would be to consider that it is only because of what did happen are we as fans in a position to regret what could have been--his leadership brought OU to such heights that we could see mountain tops yet to climb. [sappy but true]

Here is the post I originally started last football season; the strong finish to the 2016 season, sadly Bob Stoops last, caused me to revise my priors somewhat...

Starting with the premise that OU's expectations of championship-level football have not been met during the last 8 years (2009-2016); what is the explanation? 

Make no mistake about it, the past 8 years have been at a VERY high level of success--what 95% of teams would consider completely satisfying and what >50% of teams could never dream of: 
  • 81-24 overall record--77%.
  • 5-3 bowl record (bowl game every year including 4 major bowls).
  • 1 national championship competed for (lost to Clemson in semifinals).
  • 4 conference titles; competitive (my view) 5 of 8 years (50%!!! but against a debilitated league).
  • Record breaking performances by both the team and individuals including several players competing for top national awards--the Heisman among them. (My views on the Heisman reflect why this is an after thought in this list.)
Yet the prior 10 years were stronger: 
  • 109-24 overall record--82%.
  • 4-6 bowl record (bowl game every year including 7 major bowls).
  • 4 national championships competed for (won against Florida St.; lost to LSU, USC, and Florida).
  • 6 conference titles; competitive 9 of 10 years (60%!!! against a very tough league)
  • Even more record breaking performances and quite a few more awards won including two Heismans, FWIW.
The records are both great and quite close except for the nuance that OU's contention for titles (national and conference) was much stronger. 

So, given the premise, I can think of three possibilities and two alternatives:

1. The Sooners have simply been unlucky the past 8 years.

2. They were lucky in the beginning of the Stoops era (the first 10 years before the last 8 years) and the ability to reach OU's lofty expectations simply was never there.
3. They were up to fulfilling expectations at the beginning of the Stoops era but now they have faded in capabilities (the game as passed them by).

Alternatively we could say:

4. The premise is bad because they actually have been competing at a championship level--just less completely as might be possible/desired (i.e., too few championships achieved).

5. The expectation was faulty (i.e., they shouldn't expect to compete at a championship level).

I hope for 1, fear 2, and slightly suspect 3, but I highly suspect 4 and strongly reject 5. That puts me in possibility 1 assuming the premise and alternative 4 if I can question it.

Assuming the premise, my guess is about 70% of all Sooner fans fall into possibility 1, about 10% fall into 2, and about 20% fall into 3. But these answers would have been significantly different if looked at right after the loss to Ohio State and a 1-2 start to the 2016 season.
 
Allowing for the alternatives, I would then guess that the assignment of Sooner fans would be about like this:

Possibility 
% of Fans
1
50%
2
7%
3
18%
4
20%
5
5%


The fans that don't jump from possibility 1 to possibility 4 once we allow the questioning of the premise probably have unrealistic expectations--they think their team should ALWAYS win. I am tempted to dismiss these folks as fans who think the winning team "just wanted it more". I am tempted to dismiss fans who jump to possibility 5 (presumably from possibilities 2 or 3) as fans who would be happier rooting for a much lesser team so as to increase the emotional gain from a win and decrease the emotional pain of a loss (i.e., no true Sooners).

All fans will make their own evaluations over the course of the Lincoln Riley era, though, probably not with the formality I bring to the matter. And the measure will be how does that era match up to all 18 amazing years under Stoops. I wish Bob the best and thank him for the happiness he brought me as a fan.

I wish Lincoln luck. I fully expect that he has what it takes to keep the Sooners' status as a contender, but satisfying The Monster takes more than ability. It takes luck.

Boomer Sooner!

Sunday, April 30, 2017

I'll Have What She's Having

This email from Marco Bresba to Tyler Cowen on food versus music as social status signature really resonated with me.

I have always been out of step with music culture. Growing up I was 1-2 decades behind my peers enjoying music from my parent's generation and the 1/2 generation between us. Because I never liked kid's music, though, I was an outsider in kindergarten (listening to adult music) and then an outsider in junior high and high school for the same reason. My horizons have very much broadened in the past two decades and I have friends, lovers, and (mostly) the Internet to thank for that.

People think of me as a foodie, a title I cringe at a bit when assigned to me. I am definitely 1+ standard deviations to the right on food knowledge, experience, and willingness. But at the same time, I know what I don't know and don't do.

My relationship with food and my fellow man is a perfect microcosm for how I see most issues. I agree with no one. On the one hand I try to hold back a knee-jerk, mocking disdain for those to the left of me on the distribution (to abuse that analogy a bit more). The complacency (and that is the perfect methaphor) aggravates my less-charitable self. Eventually I come around to my higher principles--de gustibus non est disputandum--and I seek to accept their mockery of my choices leaving an open door to help guide them along the journey should they choose enlightenment. And yes, I am being sarcastic about my arrived status because . . .

On the other hand I have a hard time hiding my inner-eye roll at those reaching mightily for ultimate food nirvana. My knee-jerk reaction to those demonstrating their fringe and elite status is to assume it is not genuine. I keep waiting for them to rediscover the hot dog, but only concede that it is a desired food once deconstructed from a food truck or simply for the sake of irony. This extreme is its own version of complacency. Rather than make choices for themselves, we have a group looking to peers for the next best (and approved) thing.

This is me at any dinner party. I am either the most avant-garde among a group of conventional wisdom followers (whose motto might be "Choose Sliced Bread, the best thing from here on out!) or I am the most conventional (small-c conservative) among a group of would-be trend setters. Like I say, my food tastes are a microcosm. For once conversation starts I will find myself uneasily choosing how much to politely disagree and hoping the others will appreciate that true respect comes not from acquiescence but from honest/divergent/challenging discussion.

Saturday, April 29, 2017

To UBI, or not to UBI

Alternatively titled, "I Wish I Were BIG".

An idea that has been percolating for a couple years now is a replacement of the current welfare/income transfer system with a Universal Basic Income (UBI) or Basic Income Guarantee (BIG). This idea has origins back to Milton Friedman's Negative Income Tax idea first introduced in Capitalism and Freedom back in 1962.

Watch this space. I predict this idea grows to dominate the debate especially as the unarguably unsustainable social welfare systems reach critical breaking points.

I find the idea fascinating for a number of reasons. My biases creep in all along this debate starting with its origins with Friedman. Some central considerations:

  1. Is the proposal(s) simplification a feature or a bug? My bias is to always simplify all else equal.
  2. Does it replace the entire welfare system (including Medicare and Social Security)? My bias is to replace it all.
  3. Can we reliably replace rather than have this be a politically-captured add on to the current mess? My bias is to avoid opportunities for add on--i.e., I worry about this risk.
  4. Can we trust people to make their own decisions (i.e., cash versus in-kind support)? My bias is to allow adults to be adults and not dictate their choices at least not through the government. On-the-ground private charity will undoubtedly find their mileage varies along this dimension. 
  5. Should it be a very basic subsistence level of aid or a substantial amount (i.e., allow you to pursue that well-fed artist career you've always dreamed of)? My bias is to the low end.
The tension between directional versus destination libertarians is thick here. The interesting and constructive debate is fully within the directional camp (i.e., is this a long-term improvement towards the ideal?). By no means is this a first-best solution (i.e., not a destination).

Bryan Caplan is against the idea. My bias is to first assume Caplan is correct in all things he has a strong opinion on. David Henderson agrees with Caplan. The discussion between Caplan and Ed Dolan is a very thorough treatment of the topic (DEFINITELY read the whole thing). Now cue Mike Munger to start making the strong case for it. Arnold Kling was not impressed. And he makes a strong point about means-tested aid versus behavior-tested aid including where (government or private charity) the competitive advantage in each resides. 

The devil is in the details SO MUCH in this quagmire. Perhaps the most critical (and damning) question is who would be politically capable of achieving this type of a change. While I am very sympathetic to the idea, I cannot conceive of any name attached to the Congressional act that would give me any trust I could support the measure.

P.S., Sorry for all the "i.e." use.

Saturday, April 15, 2017

The Cure for What Ails American Trade

Trump wants to “win” international trade, and he is considering renegotiation of finalized deals and taxes (for imports) and subsidies (for exports) to accomplish the feat. Those won’t work. Here is what will.

You have to make America lousy, again for the first time. Cue the action plan—do them all for the full interactive effect (links are in some cases NSFW):
  1. American assets are too attractive to foreigners. Require that U.S.-based assets cannot have more than 25% foreign ownership.
  2. The dollar’s too damn high! We have to make import purchases less desirable and export sales more desirable. Inflation is the tool for the task. Announce and begin immediately paying off all U.S. government liabilities (interest, salaries, and debts) with newly created money. Hey, we just cured the national debt as well. 
  3. Rates of return are too good. Increase taxes especially on savings/investment. Take the current rates, and double them.
  4. Importing is too easy. Prohibit customs processing for imports on days that begin with the letters “W” or “T” (for “Win Trade”).
  5. Reduce property rights. The security investors enjoy knowing that American assets are relatively secure in title and protected from theft and abuse is making investment in America too desirable. Start with strong asset forfeiture confiscation and regulation which effects de facto takings. 


This is just a start. If we really put our minds to it, we can certainly screw this place up.

P.S., I can’t believe I just linked to Krugman. See what Trump has done to this country!

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Highly Linkable - "progress" report edition

Let us begin with all the answers: The Cato Handbook for Policy Makers - it reads like stereo instructions for solving public policy problems.

Tyler Cowen has a new book, The Complacent Class, this short video is a good introduction. He suggests you can turn the book into winning advice. And perhaps it offers a unique explanation of Trump.


More from Cowen: Let he who cannot assimilate cast the first stone.


The Trump Rally? Scott Sumner cautions against the conventional view.

Dollars, Taxes: It is that time of year again. One of the promised blessings of President Trump is tax reform. Unfortunately, but perhaps not surprisingly, the version we will get is anything but ideal. Cowen explains. And Scott Sumner points out what economists know about taxes that the general public doesn't.

Do we need a national health policy? Steven Landsburg strongly suggests the question is silly on its face and requires more and different thought than what is generally offered.

One area of public policy Trump is offering no progress on is Social Security along with its ~$11 TRILLION of unfunded liability (i.e., debt in addition to the official national debt). Regardless of the chances, Bob Murphy has thought through a first-step solution to be considered before the inevitable changes to the benefit formula: Let people opt out. 

Speaking of letting people make decisions for themselves (and why shouldn't we given that they are in the best position to make good decisions as it concerns themselves), a surprising thing happened to an Ivy-league professor when she did a study of check-cashing businesses by working at one. She changed her mind about the business's virtues. (HT: David Henderson)


Scott Alexander kindly suggests some groups of people who we don't have to hate.

Saturday, February 25, 2017

The Best Laid Plans

It is hard to stop planning--to go from preparing, which is safe and a bit fun, to actually doing. It can be hard to actually use stuff you've been keeping for that special occasion or rainy day. But that is why you were keeping it in the first place! 

Studying is ultimately about performance on the test. Practice is ultimately about playing in the game. Planning is ultimately about execution. Saving is deferred but eventual using.

In Evernote I have a note that serves as a brainstorm journal on blogposts I am planning to write but haven't yet. It is literally 19 pages long. Lack of time and a character flaw of perfectionism are my excuses for the procrastination.

Here is some good advice on converting planning into doing. 

Here is the case against 'just-in-case' items. 

Often we are not actually planning at all--we are just daydreaming. Daydreams can be ends in themselves, but their seductive allure can be destructive as they can be the antithesis of achievement. Daydreaming can be the first stage in the three-act progression (dream-plan-achieve). It can also be a fantasy world that doesn't and won't ever exist. Recognizing which one you are engaged in is vital to success. It is easy to confuse yourself in this regard and easier still to confuse those who are making their own plans around yours. 

My advice, which is for myself as much as anyone, is to not allow the 'someday I'd like to ...' daydreaming without honestly identifying if I am writing fiction or making plans. Ideally this would avoid the confusion of daydreaming as ends and daydreaming as means. Get busy living or get busy dying. There are enough real constraints preventing us from 'someday' being 'today'. Life doesn't need any help with roadblocks. Aspire to the end result, but admit that aspiration is just fruitless desire in the absence of actual progress. Plan to do.

R.I.P. Rosling and Arrow

This month saw the passing of two giants. Not many people in history truly change minds. These two men did.

Kenneth Arrow: Among his many contributions, he proved that majority-voting will always lead to suboptimal results. There are many fine tributes linked here.

Hans Rosling: Among his many contributions, he showed time and again that what we believe about poverty and development is simply and tragically wrong. Tim Harford has a great More or Less podcast tribute. The NYT obit is good too.

May their ideas, influence, and spirits live on.

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Update on the Once and Future Tsar

Well, we are one month into the greatness. And it has been stellar!

Steve Palpatine Bannon finally spoke using his own voice instead of the orange puppet. Spoiler alert: Anyone who proudly speaks of 'economic nationalism' isn't going to win the Shazam Prize in Economics

He laid out three pillars of Trump's plan, and two out of three were bad. He starts with national security and sovereignty--we know how that has gone so far. Next comes the same type of thinking applied to trade--you see, kids, menage a trois (or menage a beaucoup when plus de deux) is bad in trade. Lastly is a promise that I would like to see come to play out, 'deconstruction' of the administrative state--can we count on this crew to pull anything like that off? I am highly doubtful. I believe they lack the ideological integrity to follow through or the intellectual acuity to be successful. My guess is that they want the administrative state to work for them rather than to truly reduce its breadth or depth.

What about Dodd-Frank and Obamacare reform? Well, where is the Republican Congress? They are the only chance at that. Meanwhile we lose ground on immigration, drug policy, and asset forfeiture. School choice, reversing net neutrality, and satire are among the areas that still have a good degree of optimism for progress. 

We will see...

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Highly Linkable

First of all, it is settled--I will be inviting Alton to my Super Bowl party next year.

But I'm not inviting Adam because he ruins everything--in this case debunking 13 things that aren't true.

Carol Anne, they're out there.

Speaking of scary things, the news isn't so calming. I find Bryan Caplan's advice to be a sound counter to the tide of common opinion. 

The most I'll allow myself to speculate is that the supposed momentum issue in today's politics of a desire to look inwardly to protect what we have and regain what we've lost will be soon enough revealed as a chimera based on delusion. As Scott Sumner says, absolute poverty dwarfs relative discomfort as a material issue. (BTW, thanks again to Scott for his time in OKC and his nice comments at the bottom of that post).

If you want evidence of how phony the President's argument is and the unlikelihood of lasting "reforms" brought by his administration, look to this illustration of just one widget's journey through a supply chain that spans all of the NAFTA countries. (hat tip: David Henderson)

Alas, fear of Trump ruination continues to grip many. I recommend more advice from Bryan Caplan--embrace limited government!

Trump's own ruination appears more likely to me. I am just surprised by how fast it seems to be developing (perhaps this is wishful thinking). In fact I fear it will all be but wishful thinking that meaningful, good reforms will come from this Republican government. Perhaps Congress will be compelled to tell The Donald "You're Fired!" in short order and a President Pence can then be the signator to healthcare reform, corporate tax reform, and perhaps even major tax reform that can be bundled with climate change (externality) reform. It is amazing how simple and achievable these solutions can be--and accessible when presented by John Cochrane.

What I'm Listening To (Podcast Rundown)

Between my daily commute and my work travels, I get a lot of windshield time. That is all made a lot easier now that the world has podcasts. Here is my current subscription list in somewhat my listening preference order. Of course, length, topicality, and my personal mood make that order a moving target--so don't read too much into it.

Podcast Comments
EconTalk If you asked me for the most consistently rewarding podcast, this is where I would point you.
Freakonomics If you were brand new to podcasts, this is where I would have you start.
MRUniversity Bite-sized, very well crafted economics lessons. All are self recommending. Money Skills, Econ Duel, and Everyday Economics are perhaps my top recommendations for newcomers. Macro and Micro are excellent introductory courses. 
Cato Daily Podcast If you asked for the best briefing on political topics, this is the one I'd recommend.
Reason Video Podcast Reason has their stuff together. From humorous, short parodies and commentaries to long-form interviews, this videocast is well worth it. Trigger warning, they often cover topics that will leave you mystified if not down right enraged.
Conversations with Tyler He has a wonderful gift for getting deeply into a deep, impactful thinker's mind. 
The Alton Browncast Would we expect anything less than gold from the most entertaining chef in history? Terrifically it is generally not about food; although, it is often loaded with food. 
Free Thoughts If you wanted to seriously learn about libertarian thought, this would be the best podcast source. Even-toned, intelligent, and accessible.
The Way I Heard It with Mike Rowe If you remember the best part of AM radio, you'll be instantly hooked on this one. If you can't, don't worry. You'll still be hooked.
The Libertarian Podcast A well-reasoned, deeply educated, libertarian take on the issues of the day. I find myself in strong agreement 95% of the time. I listen to podcasts now at 2x speed. This one is usually the most difficult in that regard even though I know the topic well. Epstein talks and thinks FAST!
So you can probably pick one of these next three (Ferriss, Altucher, Manliness) finding the one whose style best fits your taste and get most of the same content since the guests tend to overlap so much. However, I find each rewarding in its own right.
The Tim Ferriss Show I like how he has a life-hacking approach to, well, life and how he turns each guest into a teacher revealing the tools they have used for success.
The James Altucher Show His style lends itself to an approachable format. The constant interruptions are a feature in that they provoke a more meaningful conversation.
The Art of Manliness A pretty good way to check up on and improve upon your personal level of grit.
Macro Musings Macro is the most controversial part of economics. It is perhaps not surprisingly also one of the most difficult to understand. David Beckworth does a splendid job illuminating the sources of controversy and reducing the confusion of the subject.
Penn's Sunday School Entertaining first and foremost. I find his support for liberty and libertarianism a strong virtue despite my quibbles here and there with his delivery or details (in his defense he ALWAYS includes the disclaimer that he is "wrong, wrong, wrong!"). The atheism, which is arguably the point of the podcast, can be a good challenge to my own religious beliefs as well as a healthy way to learn from a convicted, intelligent advocate from the other side. 
99% Invisible Weekly they manage to make interesting the details about stuff all around us that we completely ignore.
Reply All This one almost never fails to bring me new information. I have found quite a few of these episodes very surprisingly interesting--even after my expectations were elevated. The only negative is when it makes me feel old. I am basically always in the "No" category of "Yes, Yes, No".
Myths and Legends Recommended by a Fribrarian. This one surprised me with how addictive it is. I swear I'm not this big of a nerd.
TEDTalks (hd) I would guess I make it all the way through about one third of these with one third skipped altogether just based on the topic and description. The ones I do select make the subscription well worth it.
Revisionist History Counter-conventional wisdom from a wise counter conventional. 
50 Things That Made the Modern Economy Tim Harford--so say no more. Dense vignettes about . . .  well, read the title.
Cato Event Podcast Heavy on the wonk factor, but I like to go deep. 
More or Less: Behind the Stats Tim Harford, again. While the circumstances of specific cases in their numbers analyses are compelling, it is the ubiquitous principals at work where the real learning lies.
MinuteEarth Almost always pretty interesting (and if not, it is only 1-3 minutes long), these, like their now podcast dormant forefather MinutePhysics (you can still get it on YouTube (hey, I need to do a post about what I'm watching on YouTube)), are how primary school science should be taught.
Economic Rockstar This one gives me exposure to economists I wouldn't normally be exposed to (getting me outside my bubble).
Surprisingly Awesome They take the mundane and show how it is actually not so bad and sometimes even quite amazing.
StartUp Podcast Like the Serial podcast, there was significant drop off between season 1 and season 2, but I still found season 2 rewarding. Season 3 was a step up, and it has gotten better in season 4.
Tell Me Something I Don't Know Since this one is directly about a common theme in most of my podcasts, it seems obvious that I would follow it. However, it is new. And while results so far have been rewarding, time will tell if it has staying power.
Science Vs Overall, a good concept and good execution. The limits it runs into are symptomatic of the very premise--you can't let "what does the science say" run your life. It is not so simple. Science doesn't allow for normative claims.
The Moment with Brian Koppelman These interviews are an interesting twist on the traditional 'talk to a famous or important person'. He is good at evoking the interviewees' source of their personal success.
StarTalk Radio Another Fribrarian recommendation. Two things about this one make it a draw for me: 1) they cover an area of interest for which I am a only superficially well informed, and 2) they think about problems differently than do I which serves to expand my thought processes. The negative is when they venture into areas they do not know well; namely economics. They can be astonishingly poor at economic reasoning.
Heavyweight This one has been hit and miss. The storytelling is compelling, but the content isn't always so. 
Dan Carlin's Hardcore History From a friend's recommendation. Haven't started it yet, but it looks promising. Episodes are looooonnnnggg.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Choosing Your Neighbors

If I had my druthers, I would choose retired couples who are infatuated with my children. The advantages are numerous including:

  • They'd be quiet.
  • They'd keep an eye out.
  • They'd keep their yard tidy.
  • They'd dote on my children.
  • They'd think I invented technology.
  • They'd be dependable and predictable.

One might think I'd say sorority girls who enjoy their pool parties. Problems range from making me feel old and unattractive to finding me attractive and tempting me to throw away a lifetime for 30 minutes of bliss (or performance anxiety).

The reality is you can't choose your neighbors. And you probably wouldn't want to. Turns out those older retired couples have some bad qualities too. They are pretty good at minding your business. They are always up for conversation--ALWAYS. If they spot you in the yard, you are automatically in for a round of "Let's Talk About My Latest Doctor Visit". They know the neighborhood covenants extremely well including all the ones you are currently breaking, and they know that those covenants are not suggestions--they are serious dogma to be followed with strict religiosity. They like things as they are and better yet as they were and best yet as never changing.

There are no perfect neighbors. This documentary proves it.

Planning out and carefully choosing those around us would create a stale, uninspiring bubble world with high susceptibility to overrate the qualities we think we want and underrate those we think we want to avoid. Those biases would yield continuously disappointing results.

To a large degree you do get to pick your neighbors and they get to pick you. Our lives are characterized greatly by self selection. Fortunately it isn't the sole determining factor, though. New ideas, new opportunities, new methods: these things come from chance encounters and unplanned coordination and interaction.

Look at immigration as this microcosm writ large, and think about it from a purely selfish perspective. Every immigrant we discourage, turn away, or ban is another worker, another set of new ideas, another opportunity to discover something didn't know existed but now eagerly want.

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Highly Linkable - Philosophy Edition

Rounding out our series of link posts to get us caught up we have this. Enjoy!

Begin with Bryan Caplan making a claim against animal rights. The brilliant Mike Huemer then replied. Caplan counters. Then Huemer. Then Caplan. Then . . . you get the picture. By the time I got to this one, I was surprisingly receptive to Huemer's position. But I think Caplan edges the stronger case. I learned something. Perhaps you will too.

And now two from Scott Sumner (Who incidentally was the keynote speaker at CFA Society Oklahoma's annual dinner held last week. He did a fine job as is no surprise.)

In the first you may be surprised at what "primitive culture" he is aiming his argument.

In the second we see how the possibility of surprising information makes all knowledge subjective where a probability spectrum rather than two realms (certainty and uncertainty) delineates what we know.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Life Moves Pretty Fast

Life is complicated. Here is a partial list of some principles I use to help guide my reasoning and action. 

  • Keep your options alive. Optionality is a very important and undervalued concept. And the corollary: Options are more valuable than plans.
  • When in doubt, choose the upside. This does not mean be optimistic, although I am. This is about positioning oneself to be disproportionately exposed to upside potential. 
  • Be optimistic. There will be another day. Things will get better than how they seem at their worst or when considered from the worst-case scenario. 
  • Yield (choose 'flight') in the face of irrationality. Stand up (choose 'fight') in the face of injustice.
  • Trust in market processes. And the corollary: Trust the signal the market is providing.
  • There is enjoyment and learning in any and every situation.
  • When in doubt, choose quality over quantity or efficiency.
  • Don't by default attribute to malice what you could otherwise attribute to ignorance or bad luck. This one is adopted by recommendation of Tim Ferris (it is really just Hanlon's Razor), but I was already working with something very similar before I heard his version. My version goes: Don't assume ill intent; assume ill design or poor execution. People are much more likely to be stupid or unlucky than evil.
  • Taken directly from Derek Sivers: If it is not "Hell Yeah!, then it is "No."
  • Improve everything that you touch. Don't take my word for it. Dr. King said it much better. And the corollary: Be selective about what you engage in and be satisfied with reasonable improvements. Remember that perfectionism is a fault not a virtue.
  • Specialize in your competitive advantages; seek to outsource everything else. Following this advice is the road to success. Don't take my word for it. Steve Martin is a better authority.
  • Assume there is a good reason for things you find puzzling, but consider that improvements are possible.

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Walls? Walls! We don't need no stinkin' walls!

Partial list of nations and empires with famous walls:

China: The Great Wall
Germany: Berlin Wall
Israel: Israeli West Bank barrier
Roman Empire: Hadrian’s Wall
Roman Empire: Walls of Constantinople
Jerusalem: Western Wall (AKA, Wailing Wall)


Partial list of great American bridges.

Golden Gate
Brooklyn
Chesapeake Bay
Seven Mile
Rio Grande Gorge
covered bridges in Madison County
Multnomah Falls footbridge


You can argue about which actually make it in the list. Name the great American walls. The Vietnam Wall is the only one that comes to my mind--a wall very different than walls as we think of them.

We have always been a nation that built bridges. Freedom works. Trade works. Immigration works.

Highly Linkable - Pure Economics Edition

We continue catching up on links with three on economics. Every one of these contains a large degree of counter-conventional wisdom. Something for which I am a sucker.

First is John Cochrane being interviewed by Russ Roberts on Economic Growth and Changing the Policy Debate. I very much like the way Cochrane's perspective and approach to this topic is hopeful, straightforward, and wise.

And I could say the same about George Selgin's strong rebuttal to the conventional wisdom that the fed has been holding down interest rates.

Mike Munger challenges the assumptions many might make about how a free-market thinker would approach an issue of business interest versus a group that technically doesn't own an interest--I say "technically" and probably should say "by being robbed".

Friday, January 20, 2017

The Age of Trump

Tomorrow one third of the United States' government leadership will change hands from one who once promised hope and change to one who now promises the same but supposedly of a different variety.

The tension around this transition is particularly elevated. Not since Hoover-Roosevelt has a U.S. presidential interregnum been so ugly. How will the final moments play out? Will Obama be gracious or will he smugly toss the football? Will the White House be adorned with golden accents? Will a great wall emerge protecting us from things we'd like to buy and people we'd like to meet? How great shall our greatness be?

Below is a partial list of my areas of optimism and pessimism as yet another self-greatness seeking charlatan proceeds to chase away our ideals.

Before I begin, a quick look at the optimism/pessimism I predicted about one year ago when Trump was but a surprising front runner though still a dark horse.
Optimistic - Shows why we should lose (and should have lost a long time ago) our reverent awe for the U.S. Presidency; prevents major government action/intervention/meddling on any number of issues by being a circus act writ large (his administration's priorities will be prestige and showmanship rather than policy accomplishment); forces a meaningful debate and action on limiting executive power (a little bit in tension with the previous prediction as this one mitigates a Trump administration that is actually trying to do something).
Pessimistic - Engages in major international war actions (beyond the high amount the each of his opponents would do anyway); sets back trade freedom and immigration substantially; creates strong racial, ethnic, nationalistic, and gender divides.
Overall - I estimate the optimistic possibilities are more likely than the pessimistic possibilities. 
 Optimism:

  • Taxes - As with many of these, Trump himself is not really the source of optimism. Rather the Republican Congress is the new hope. Trump is just the chance that a good reform will be drafted with the expectation that he will sign it into law.
  • Regulation - He continues to talk strongly about reducing the monstrous regulatory burden our federal empire exerts. The areas of particular expectation are banking & finance (Dodd Frank) and health care/medicine/insurance (ACA/Obamacare), but also environmental; although I am less sanguine about the prospects there. 
  • Presidential Power & Authority - This one is borrowed my original. I believe the return of the left is long overdue in this area. Perhaps it will take this time... doubtful. The same can be said for the anti-war movement. Their 8-year hibernation is now over. Remy puts it well in the second verse. 
There is no doubt these are important areas; yet, so are those I put in the pessimistic camp.

Pessimism:
  • Trade - Astute readers will notice how many of these in the pessimism category are related. Is his rhetoric enough to satiate the unintentional, populist desire to be poorer? Our trade deficit/capital account surplus is not some phantom menace plaguing our economic well being. Is he really so dense as to believe the nonsense he speaks on this issue? . . . based on the rest of his behavior . . . Okay, good point.
  • Immigration - The free exchange of labor is every bit as important a contributor (perhaps even a greater contributor) to our economic wealth as is the free exchange of goods and services. His attack on those not from around here is both disgusting and discouraging. Again, I hope this is a clone of the prior item where it is all about rhetoric and not action.
  • Nationalism - We don't need more tribal thinking in this world. Unfortunately, he nurtures this toxin. He wants revenge on those not allowing us to be great.
  • War - Here my outlook is just slightly negative. I'm grading on a curve based on the past two Commanders in Chief. I think he will tend to reduce the areas of conflict where both Bush and Obama took us. However, the risk he runs of allowing an awoken force from Russia or China is elevated compared to the prior administrations. Think reduced magnitude across the bulk of the probable war fronts but with increased risk in the extremes (tail risk).
  • Drug policy - I suspect he views drugs in the traditional simplistic framework (good versus evil). Drug users are rogues who must be dealt with. The first one to tell him he can't win the war on drugs will seal our fate in continuing the evil work that is that battle.
  • Government Meddling - From the Carrier deal to GM to you name it, the picture so far is bad for economic growth specifically and bad for liberty in general.
  • Free Speech - For as much as he deplores PC, he certainly can't take criticism. He has flat out said we need to reign in speech. 
  • Internet freedom - This may be a small issue, but perhaps it is a litmus test for how he will govern overall. He said we need to look into 'closing that Internet up'. His nominee for Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, as well as his vice president, Pence, are outspoken in their disdain for internet poker. They want to keep us safe . . . from ourselves and our choices.
  • Surveillance State - I suspect no relief. 
  • Gender Issues/Tolerance - While I actually think he actually takes a lot of unfounded and unfair flack regarding areas like race and sexual orientation, his sexism is undeniable. He is not just crude. He is misogynistic. It is hard to be very trusting that this strong character flaw and his errors in judgment don't and won't extend beyond objectifying women. 
Overall:

The Trump years (and they will be years despite the hope of so many for impeachment or that he would divorce America to be president of some younger Eastern European country) might be an odd combination of dramatic progress and colossal retreat. I think the eventual decisive factor will be how strong and righteous Congress is. I believe the case for optimism has a greater magnitude than the case for pessimism, but the negative sensitivity is high--meaning prospects are skewed with more downside risk than upside potential while the balance is still to the upside. 

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Highly Linkable - Politics Edition

Continuing with the links posts to bring us up to date, here is the politics version.

Let's start with a post that encapsulates everything that is wrong with politics today.

Trade was a big presidential topic for the first time in decades. Steven Landsburg offered two strong, short posts back in June--see here then here. Sadly, I don't believe they carried salience with the voters.

Bryan Caplan made his case for why he does not vote (a position I strongly share and generally, faithfully follow) while his co-blogger David Henderson made a strong case for activism and by logical extension for voting (a position I found compelling and challenging to my own point of view). For the first time in 20 years, I voted to cast a ballot for the Libertarian ticket (Johnson/Weld). Sadly, they did poorly as compared to the apparent opportunity; although, they did well compared to prior Libertarian campaigns.

The Electoral College (consistent law of the land and method for protecting minority interests) was back under scrutiny being that Trump did not win the popular vote (the myth that 50% plus 1 vote = the best outcome). Of the many very good articles supporting the Electoral College, John Cochrane's struck me as particularly good.

And Cochrane wasn't finished with good political posts. He has some excellent advice for the new boss to make him not the same as the old boss. Sadly, Trump's official failures as a president have started before taking office.

I will be writing soon about where I am optimistic and where I am pessimistic about the new administration and Congress.


Saturday, January 7, 2017

...writing post title...quit check of email and facebook...back to post - 2016 Resolution Fulfillment

For the longest time I have held myself out as a master multitasker. Part of this was probably because being able to do more than one thing well at one time simply has to be superior to being only a unitasker. I share Alton Brown's loathing of unitaskers in the kitchen. [bonus points if you know the one unitasker he allows in the kitchen]

But I have had a volte–face: I now believe that multitasking is a bug rather than a feature. (I still share Alton's view regarding kitchen gear.)

My wandering mind is not the juggling Jedi I hold it out to be. Rather it is a bungling, distracted toddler that needs to concentrate for best results. As with all things of this nature it is a matter of degree along a spectrum rather than an absolute dichotomy. And to that end I have moved decisively from the position that multitasking is desirable (i.e., good performance at multiple tasks done in concert is possible) to the position that unitasking is desirable.

How well something can be done is directly proportional to how singularly it can be focused upon. Adding complexity is not an efficient way to use up slack resources (spare brain power, excess stress aptitude, extra time, etc.). It is simply a way to make the success in the original task less likely.

And of course there are TED Talks on the subject. The Instant Gratification Monkey will make you laugh as it indirectly touches on my position. This one really gets to the multitasking points about the 6 minute mark--so feel free to shop on Amazon while it plays in the background until that point.

Highly Linkable - Science! Edition

This is a special episode of highly linkable. Following my hiatus, a backlog of links has developed. I am breaking them down into a few groups to keep it organized. As always, extra credit if you follow and complete all links in a particular post. This one is focusing on Science--both the science version as well as the Science! version. Hence, there is a mixture of politics, public policy, and economics in all of these. Enjoy!

Starting with the small stuff, Juan Enriquez suggests Wise Reprogramming of Life and asks What Will Humans Look Like in 100 Years.

Now that the simple ones are out of the way, let's get just a bit controversial by diving into Climate Change first with Megan McArdle telling Global-Warming Alarmists, You're Doing It Wrong and second with Hooper & Henderson pointing out a A Fatal Flaw with Climate Models.

We've discussed in the past the predicted continued rise in crop yields. Read this to see how robots will help aid the process. (Beware: economic ignorance alert at the end. Next time someone says "there are no stupid questions", direct them to the one that concludes this article).

This EconTalk interview, "But What If We're Wrong", with Chuck Klosterman is quite rewarding. Of course I would like it. I have a perpetual New Year's Resolution on just that concept.

Matt Ridley supplies a great addition to the growing wisdom that dieting is not about reducing fat. Notice the echos to Chuck Klosterman in the article.

Sticking with weight-loss for a moment, check out this piece from Vox on "The science is in: Exercise isn’t the best way to lose weight".

But maybe Vox is wrong. Scott Alexander challenges them on another topic, EpiPens.

I could have inserted these two short posts from Arnold Kling anywhere here. The first is his thoughts on Earth Day. The second is a quick econ lesson on organic farming.

And that all brings us to discuss science versus anti-science including just how false that comparison really is. First Reason asks if Republicans or Democrats are more anti-science. Second John Tierney discusses The Real War on Science.

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

Welcome Back

So it is, I return. Been away awhile. Way longer than desired, but I found my way back. The names have changed since I hung around. My dreams might have been my ticket out, but they remained and turned me around. I have come home.

No, dear reader, I don't mean this return to blogging; although it might equally apply. Rather the hiatus from blogging was largely driven by a return to where I live. Back around the time of the last post, we began searching in growing earnest for a destination home in Norman, OK. We found that home, just a couple blocks from campus and all the eclectic life that brings.

We always knew we'd make the move, but always found reasons to postpone. Until one day, we didn't. We let one thing lead to another and all of a sudden we stopped dreaming and started pursuing.

Financially we could have waited longer--way longer. We could have taken a stepping-stone path into a smaller place not quite so close and not quite so right. Remember that quote about playing it safe and letting life happen to you? I don't either.

“Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn’t do than by the ones you did. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.” – Mark Twain