Economics

"Slow Economic Growth: It's the Regulations, Stupid!"

As the kids say today, "Yasssss!"

See also Eugene Fama:

Everybody wants the world to be a better place and some think that government actions can bring that about. But they don’t take into consideration that government actions can often do more harm than good. My view is that the world is just too regulated. There is regulation of everything these days. For instance, it’s too difficult to start a business. The rate of business formation in the US has gone way down and listed companies have declined by 30%. So with less regulation I think you would see growth come back.

And this, from Heritage: "Red Tape Rising 2016: Obama Regs Top $100 Billion Annually".

And this: "What’s Killing Jobs and Stalling the Economy".


"Resurrecting the Interesting Questions"

Professor Karlson wonders "But now, the old worries are back, and when even the University of Chicago has to make do with a chart showing rising concentration of revenues, how long will it be before another concentration-and-profits regression lands in a journal?"

Probably not profits-concentration: they'll just keep publishing price-concentration studies which are just as misguided.

 


"The Clemson-NCSU paradox. Can someone explain it?"

The EJMR bros wrestle inconclusively with one of the big questions of our time:

Can anyone explain to me how Clemson can have the majority of its Economics professors coming Chicago (plus others like MIT or Yale) while a university like North Carolina State University, which is supposed to rank over Clemson in Economics, has most of its professors coming from much lower institutions, like Indiana. Does Clemson have all the Chicago lemons? Is Clemson's faculty comparable in terms of quality to that of NCSU?


"Fannie, Freddie and the Secrets of a Bailout With No Exit"

Revealed: more lies from guess who. (Story is by Gretchen Morgenson in the New York Times.)

When Washington took over the beleaguered mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the collapse of the housing market and the financial crisis of 2008, it was with the implicit promise that they would be returned to shareholders after being nursed back to health.

But now, with the unsealing of documents this week that were produced as part of a lawsuit filed against the government, new evidence is coming to light on how intimately the White House was involved in the Treasury’s decision in August 2012 to keep all the companies’ profits for the government. That move effectively maintained Fannie’s and Freddie’s status as wards of the state.