We recently solicited your questions for Betsey Stevenson, a sometimes Freakonomics contributor and newly minted Chief Economist of the Department of Labor. Your questions were excellent and varied, and Betsey’s responses cover everything from persistent unemployment to parental leave. Thanks to Betsey and everyone who participated.
FP interviews Bob Woodward about Jim Jones’s departure and President Obama’s foreign policy strategy.
The Freakonomics blog will have to do without Betsey Stevenson for the next year as she’ll be serving as the Chief Economist of the Department of Labor (DOL). Betsey has agreed to answer your questions about her new position.
The revolving door between Capitol Hill and Washington’s lobbying community has long been a concern, even prompting a crackdown by Barack Obama. A new paper from Jordi Blanes i Vidal, Mirko Draca and Christian Fons-Rosen attempts to measure the extent of the problem by quantifying the value of the personal connections many lobbyists “acquire[d] during their public service.”
From a new working paper by Atif Mian and Amir Sufi: “We examine the ability of the government to increase consumption by evaluating the impact of the 2009 “Cash for Clunkers” program on short and medium run auto purchases.”
Want to know a bit more about Austan Gooslbee, the newly appointed chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers? Straight from the horse’s mouth, here’s a Q&A we ran with him in July 2009. There are a lot of interesting answers, including several that are perhaps more interesting now than they were then.
We recently took note of the “unbranding” movement, in which Firm A might seem to damage Firm B by sending Firm B’s product to an undesirable endorser. The example of the day was Snooki and her Gucci purse. There would seem to be no limit to the unbranding opportunities in the modern world. How about, say, politics? The Times headline says it all – “Republican Runs Street People on Green Ticket” — but Marc Lacey’s article is well worth a read.
All things — including wealth — being equal, earthquakes kill more people in dictatorships than in democracies, write NYU political scientists Alastair Smith and Alejandro Quiroz Flores. They reason that democratically elected leaders prepare their countries for disaster better because they fear they’ll be voted out of office if their governments are caught unprepared.
Last month, roughly two years into a global financial maelstrom, the U.S. Congress passed a financial-reform bill. It was more than 2,300 pages long, addressing everything from derivatives to consumer financial products to oversized banks. We asked a few clever people a simple question.
Each week, I’ve been inviting readers to submit quotations whose origins they want me to try to trace, using my book, The Yale Book of Quotations, and my more recent research. Here is the latest round.
Anxious investors can take heart: Congress’s August recess begins at the end of this week, which has historically been a good thing for the markets. Michael Ferguson and Hugh Douglas Witte found that “about 90% of the capital gains over the life of the Dow Jones Industrial Average have come on days when Congress is out of session.”
An interesting politician in Colombia.
During the 2008 presidential election, a lot of people — myself included — wondered if some sort of October Surprise might be launched. None were. In the U.K., however, Conservative leader David Cameron — the likely winner, per the prediction markets, in the yet-to-be called election — has just unleashed a doozy: his wife Samantha is expecting the couple’s fourth child.
In this interesting article from the American Prospect, Bruce Ackerman reveals how in 1957 Lyndon Johnson opposed an effort of Vice-President (and President of Senate) to reform the filibuster rule.
Does giving a man a job stop him from becoming a political insurgent? The generally accepted wisdom is that it does. In fact, the U.S. and other western powers have distributed millions of dollars of foreign aid in the hopes of reducing political violence and instability.
Making fun of earmarked Congressional spending is easy, feel-good entertainment. But is it a distraction from the bigger problem?
Representative Joe Wilson’s much discussed “You Lie” outburst last Wednesday during President Obama’s health care speech has been compared to the 1856 savage caning that Representative Preston Brooks delivered to Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner (for example, see here and here).
A couple of months ago, some Freakonomics readers wondered whether the president really had any discernible impact on the economy. This question has actually received a lot attention from political scientists and political economists. Although these scholars still dispute precisely how presidents influence the macroeconomy, few would deny that the impact is real. The following are three macroeconomic phenomena that have been attributed to a president’s party affiliation.
Levitt and I had the pleasure of visiting Rapid City, S.D., recently to give a lecture. Yes, we had time to visit Mount Rushmore, a good time made all the better by our charismatic tour guide, National Park Service Superintendent Gerard Baker (Yellow Wolf), the very tall gentleman between us here: We also had occasion to meet a phalanx of . . .
Dear Secretary Geithner, I’ve been out of touch. Sorry. I spent the last month on grand jury duty, putting Manhattan’s poor minorities behind bars. I needed a little time to recover. As promised, this is the first in a series of friendly dispatches. Advice, if you will. Learned counsel. Wisdom from the streets (as opposed to “The Street,” where wisdom . . .
The total number of hate groups operating in the U.S. has increased by more than half since 2000, according to a new report by the Southern Poverty Law Center (S.P.L.C.). Photo: upload The report, and subsequent news coverage of it, blames this distressing trend on the deteriorating economy and the election of Barack Obama. But economic downturns don’t necessarily stoke . . .
A panel of Chicago economists convened to discuss their views on the stimulus package recently, and video of the event is now available online. All the speakers had something interesting to say (including Nobel Laureate Robert Lucas being surprisingly sympathetic to government intervention). Of particular interest, in my opinion, is Kevin Murphy‘s discussion, which comes in the middle of the . . .
In the last few years, institutions have been issuing more apologies, according to an Economist article. And lately there have been calls for quite a few more (from institutions and individuals), including Wall Street to American citizens and Bernard Madoff to the people he allegedly swindled (rather than just his co-op neighbors). But aside from emotional reparations, what’s the point . . .