Update: Not quite potato chips, but soybean has Argentina’s economy on rebound.
Tell me again, why did we decide to start airplane industry instead of fostering the relatively low-tech industry such as computer chips, car parts, etc. It would be difficult for us to follow India due to our comparatively low skill level, but we have a lot to learn from China and our neighbors of south-east Asia.
You have to know what your strengths are and how to best utilize them. Lacking the strengths, you play within your ability. If you want to prosper you don’t choose your job for the prestige, you don’t take up an industry because it means you make a quantum leap into high tech world.
Russel Roberts of Cafe Hayek explains that your standard of living does not depend on the title on your business card. It does not matter if you make computer chips or potato chips. You choose the job that you do best.
“[I]f a nation’s skill level is low, making computer chips makes you poorer, not richer. It’s like me at 5′ 6′ deciding to be a basketball player because basketball players have high salaries.“
ariapn Economics
This pretty much sums it all (the school part).
ariapn Personal
I have to remember this:
“[M]athematics can establish the logical validity of an argument, …, econometrics can establish the empirical validity of an argument.
“However, math and econometrics are neither necessary nor sufficient for establishing the validity of an economic argument.”
ariapn Economics
Don Boudreaux: “Because voting is a decision-making institution in which each voter gets to express his opinions costlessly (that is, without direct, personal consequence), voters likely are rationally irrational.“
Russell Roberts, still in Cafe Hayek explains that voting to elect people with similar office is irrational because your vote is very unlikely to be a decisive vote. So your vote almost never matters. Why then we vote? Read the link. We vote because it’s a moral obligation and to be associated with others with similar identity.
Irrational, moral obligations, identity association. Hmm, seems to me the only reason to vote is an ideological one.
Somewhat a side note, we need goverment to eliminate externalities. How about that for an economic reason to vote?
ariapn Economics
Sometimes you wonder if, having moral virtues, whether people can police themselves. Not directly related, but this article gives you a picture of the need to have institution/system to maintain and control the rule of law:
“International law and transparency, we are told, are unnecessary because, unlike all of the other countries in the world, we are Americans, and we naturally believe in human rights and the rule of law. We need no special incentives to be good. But if history teaches us anything, it is that when governments, no matter how well they think of themselves, decide to free themselves from constraints, they become unconstrained, and when they refuse to make themselves accountable, they abuse their power. The only thing that has been lacking until now has been the proof of what everyone should already have known: that unchecked power leads to hubris, hubris leads to corruption, and corruption leads to violations of human rights.
Americans are proud of their devotion to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. But these cannot exist without institutional preconditions: they cannot exist if government officials insist on complete secrecy, mock international covenants, and refuse to allow their actions to be tested and constrained by law.”
ariapn Personal
I honestly don’t know why there hasn’t been an outrage in the US. Do people really have such low expectations of their leaders? “The soft bigotry of low expectations means you can be seen to outperform by merely getting by.”
This cartoon really captures the nuances.
ariapn Personal
I know this is an old book. I just listened to the audio, and for a few moments, the book really inspired my spiritual senses. I think the fact this book was written in 1968 made it much more moving, especially in these two occasions.
I was so awestruck by Arthur C. Clarke’s description of Discovery passing Jupiter that it made me contemplate on the greatness of the creation.
The other moment was Clarke’s explanation of Hal ‘s action. Hal was feeling guilty for keeping a secret. And somehow for him this guilt was something wrong, some error. However, being a supercomputer, he was unable to admit that he had made errors. This secret kept him in denial and drove him “crazy“. This got me thinking of the saying that everyone is born in a state of pure, but the actions of people around him can change him.
ariapn Personal
I read a lot of political blogs recently, it’s part of my daily routine now. I always enjoy reading op-ed pieces in newspapers, and the blogs I read are just op-eds with a few more express shots. They opine and take stands on everything.
Now, this is in contrast to what happens back home. A lot of academics are becoming arm-chair quarterbacks, providing instant analysis on various subjects to the media. I don’t want to be too critical here, let’s just say there a lot of reasons for them to do this. They are also in great demand due to media and society obsession of high academic titles.
However, in the name of academic integrity and independence, the opinions offered are sometimes too stale and shallow. They comment on policies while trying to avoid alienating the policy makers. I’d like them to play real quarterbacking one of these days. Then they really have to choose their strategy and who to throw the ball to.
ariapn Personal