Highly Linkable

Never eat a bad meal again says Todd Kliman. And don't miss this link in the article.

Scott Sumner on NYC's regressive property taxes and the residential building worth as much as many cities' entire residential markets.

Perhaps they should try rent control? Oh yeah, that is acutely harmful for the poor as well as Megan McArdle points out. In other news local area hospitals are considering blood letting as a cure for cancer.

Of course, public schools play a big role in distorting property values. The performance at NYC's private charter school Success Academy may bring some changes to that.

Think you understand Richter? Think again.

Highly Linkable

Been travelling, so been behind. Some links to begin the catch up:

A podcast about when a teenage founder of a fictional company gets bought out for real money by the adults he "fired" for being too adult.

Expensive wine is for SUCKERS!

A wonderful example of how exploitable scientific study can be especially in the realm of health--study shows eating chocolate helps weight loss!

Speaking of food, a conversation with food historian (and contrarian) Rachel Laudan. One slice,

It´s to restore some sense of the benefits of modern food so that we do not waste time and energy trying to turn back the clock but can continue to improve our food system and disseminate those improvements as widely as possible.

Russ Roberts on recently being on Paul Krugman's bad side--I'm fully with Russ, of course.

Small but important steps on the road to education freedom.

Funny thing happened while we were wringing our hands over colony collapse disorder--the market (already) adapted to it minimizing the problem. (HT: Arnold Kling)

John Cochrane addresses one of the most fundamentally important questions in U.S. political economy--how to attain sustainable 4% annual economic growth. I fully (wistfully) endorse his short list of policy solutions.

Highly Linkable

Aziz Ansari says we're lookin' for love in all the wrong places and in the process channels his inner economist.

This is an awesome new project on Hayek by Don Boudreaux. Be sure not to miss the short videos.

Life is getting better, one thread at a time . . . Project Jacquard by Google.

Alberto Mingardi argues that locavorism is anti quality and anti quantity of life.

Charles Murray wants us to fight (federal) city hall. Arnold Kling dissents insisting exit rather than voice is the answer.

"Scott Alexander" breaks down the California water problem very well and offers some good ideas for solutions.

John Cochrane takes to task Richard Thaler and behavioral economics.

"Minimum wages are great . . . except for us," says LA County union leaders.

Scott Sumner explains how people get confused about monetary policy thinking of it as credit policy. No matter how much cash Apple acquires, it cannot conduct monetary policy.

Bryan Caplan has a simple request: unlock the school library.

I find counter-conventional wisdom delicious--in this case literally so. As illustrated in this Bloomberg article, barbecue impresario Meathead Goldwyn can tell you everything you are doing wrong on the grill (for me it was several things and counting). And he applies science and logic to the process. Bon Appetit!

Highly Linkable

Doin' the wave. (don't miss the video at the bottom)

Michael Pollan drops in to see what condition LSD's condition is in. [HT: Tyler Cowen]

Guess I'll have to dial back my snobbish detesting of the imbeciles who are doing tomatoes "wrong".

And while we're getting off our dietary high horses, Megan McArdle offers some balanced food for thought.

Accountability is an important concept. We should apply it to important institutions like the Fed; so argues Scott Sumner and George Selgin. Bash the Fed!

We end with three on immigration: First, Adam Davidson in the NYT Magazine debunks the myth of the job-stealing immigrant (HT: John Cochrane). Second, Bryan Caplan challenges the idea of immigrant idleness. Third, Arnold Kling reasonably dismisses the conservatarian argument against immigration.

Highly Linkable

First, some housekeeping. Now that I have broken the streak, allusions will continue, but not necessarily in all posts.

I could watch this all day--a toy world that is the real world of Iceland and Norway. (HT: Tyler Cowen)

Along that theme, the world is a splendid, big place.

Driverless cars > race car drivers. (HT: Tyler Cowen)

Economic reality > good intentions.

(Public choice) economic reality (is also) > good intentions.

This piece by Megan McArdle hits several good points; namely that it is basically impossible to defend the Crusades and crusaders, Christianity was not and is not the Crusades, and disassociating oneself from something ugly that one was in fact never associated with is a cheap political gimmick.

And now a bit about diet, nutrition, and health:

• The [arguable] truth about "miracle" foods. (I'm a little uncomfortable with this otherwise very good article's appeal to regulatory authority.)
• Speaking of the regulatory authority's lack of credibility . . . dietary cholesterol isn't a worry . . . what'chu talkin' 'bout Willis?
• This Ask Altucher with Ari Whitten of The Low Carb Myth gives a view that speaks very closely to my own, novice view. It is short and rewarding, but takes a minute to get going.

Highly Linkable

I want to go to then.

Don Boudreaux on Piketty. Steve Landsburg on Piketty. Garrett Jones on Piketty.

Sugar bad, but fat good. I think this lady got the message.

The tide may be turning in the fight against those who want to spend OPM on the bright and shiny things. And the World Cup brings us fresh fuel to our well argued fire.

Sticking with sports, the game makers have settled with current and former college athletes. And Scott Sumner offers some critical thoughts about how anti-trust should be applied to sports leagues and organizations.

As a student of logic, I found these fallacies that don't but should exist to be quite interesting.

Detroit rapidly deteriorating as seen from Google Street View. Maybe if the just had some strong zoning laws, they could have avoided all this mess . . . No. When broad economic forces are working against you, you cannot reverse the decline by legislation or good intentions. D.C. offers a case in point.

Arnold Kling will not be invited to give a high school graduation speech any time soon, but he should be.

How to think and how to learn--including acing exams with hardly any studying. Sounds like good advice. Too much time is spent on worthless rote memorization. After all, life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.

These ants are nuts!

I'm going on vacation shortly. L.A. La-La land. In my mind, I'm already there. To that end, here are some great travel tools. Especially don't miss Rome2rio.

Highly Linkable

Two short videos lead us off. Work is a means not an ends. The world we live in is wonderful; be happy.

I want to go to there.

I want to go to then.

Tradesports is back, baby. Can't keep a good man down for long it seems.

I'd like for us to think hard for a moment about hard-boiled eggs. Next, please quit trying to make me feel guilty about foie gras.

Turning now to the item du jure in economics: Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the Twenty-First Century". There will be more soon, much more (including something about how, oops eeps, looks like his data may have had spreadsheet issues). For now just a few points with which I heartily agree: Landsburg says income inequality is something to celebrate. Cass Sunstein takes an Alfred E. Neuman approach to the issues Piketty raises (note, I do NOT heartily agree with the FDR conclusion at the bottom of the piece). But let me recast Sunstein's argument a little more clearly.

For those who reflexively agree with Piketty’s worldview, a question.

In which world would you rather live:

1. A world (starting from where we are today) in which the rich however defined (e.g., top 5%, top 1%, top .01%) see their wealth grow at 5% per year while the rest of society sees its wealth grow at 2% per year, or
2. A world (starting from where we are today) in which everyone sees their wealth grow at 1% per year?

How you answer this question says a lot about how personal envy ranks for you versus your love for others. I am not saying this is the choice we face. I am saying if it were, which would you choose?

Russ Roberts offers a great, short lesson in economics specifically regarding GDP and government expenditure. A snippet:

Here's the fallacy. Suppose I want to know your income for the year. I ask you and you tell me you made $50,000 in salary. Another way I can get to that number is to add up everything you spent money on--food, rent, clothing, entertainment, savings and so on. As long as I count everything, I get to the same number, $50,000.

Suppose I find out you spent $5000 on entertainment. It would be very wrong to say that without that spending, your income would only have been $45,000.

Read and understand this post from Scott Sumner, and you will have a better grasp on current monetary macroeconomics than quite a large portion of the economics-commentary professional class.

Climate Alert! A really small change might happen to the Earth in 100 years. So, panic now? No.

Scott Lincicome at Cato discusses two trade policies that make domestic gasoline prices higher than they would otherwise be.

Here is a sports-statistics lesson applicable and important in a wide range of fields from medicine to business: "...the complexity of a stat should not be its selling point. If a stat tells you something, but you can't act on it, it's no good." read the whole thing.

Not good at investing? Blame your caveman ancestors. Hint: Your problem is you don't and are not built to understand risk well.

Information technology and networks are all busted (HT: Barry Ritholtz). Have a nice day . . . for the record, I'm not as jaded and pessimistic as this piece, but I think there is much truth here.

Highly Linkable

Into the caves

Out on the shore

If you're looking for poetry, look elsemore.

Sumner illuminates the thing versus the thing that is done.

In Europe silver spoons aren't just a good idea, they're the law! Is a world of Ricky Stratton's really the progressive dream?

Insider trading as a parallel to prohibition.

It's Derby time; hence, it is julep time.