My morning reads:

• Just How Good is Warren Buffett Anyway? (The Reformed Broker) see also Wrap Up: The Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting, 2013 Edition (Jeff Matthews Is Not Making This Up)
• Rewarding CEOs for Share Buybacks (Crossing Wall Street)
• What the Danish negative rate experience tells us (FT Alphaville)
• Cheap ‘Junk’ Leads to Expensive Mistakes (Moneybeat)
• Less Is More: Rogue Economists Champion Prosperity without Growth (Spiegel)
• Most data isn’t “big,” and businesses are wasting money pretending it is (Quartz)
• Conservative leaders slam Heritage for shoddy immmigration study (Washington Post)
• If you get a PhD, get an economics PhD (Noahpinion)
• Disruptions: New Motto for Silicon Valley: First Security, Then Innovation (NYT)
• Jony Ive is not a Graphic Designer (stratechery)

What are you reading?


Corporate Profits as a Share of GDP
Source: Economist’s View

Category: Financial Press

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

12 Responses to “10 Tuesday AM Reads”

  1. Mike in Nola says:

    Johnny Ive doesn’t need to be a graphic designer. He already has a graphic design to follow:

  2. streeteye says:

    Big data is kind of like Lebron James … its not the size, it’s how you use it –

  3. Moss says:

    ‘the long-term track record of building wealth for Berkshire Hathaway shareholders.’

    Buffett puts shareholders first. No perks, outrageous bonuses, has major skin in his game.

  4. Chief Tomahawk says:

    Thanks for posting the Jeff Matthews link. Reading all of that has made me late for work…

  5. cowboyinthejungle says:

    I liked the Noahpinion piece, BR…thanks.

    One thing I’ll disagree about is the tense of the claim, though. I think it should read “If you got a PhD, it should have been an econ PhD.” As Noah recognizes, as soon as people follow the advice, it ceases to be true. The lag time from decision to pursue PhD to getting settled into a career path is long, often spanning cyclical changes in the job market. So, those taking his advice today may be in bad shape in 10 years vs. those choosing lab PhD’s (against all current advice).

  6. DeDude says:

    I guess it is progress when right wing groups attack a right wing group for using the classic right wing methods to produce “support” for an already locked in conclusion. Kind of funny to see stones thrown from the Cato glass house.

  7. techy says:

    **Less Is More: Rogue Economists Champion Prosperity without Growth (Spiegel)**

    I think many people have been thinking along those lines. There has to be a better way to put people to work than “building stuff to tear it down”=consumption.

  8. Livermore Shimervore says:

    re Corp Profits chart.. If 5% was the best during the booming 80′s and 6%’ish the best during the booming 90′s…and the resurgent markets have us presently at nearly double those rates (when we were creating 2 and 3 million jobs a year respectively)

    then what’s the long-term ceiling on corporate profits? So much for excessive taxes and regulation holding back businesses from making money and hiring Americans.

  9. Livermore Shimervore says:

    sorry for the cut and paste but this merits a demerit.

    “Well, Berkshire’s stock has appreciated—this is appreciation only, no dividends, mind you—981,150% since May 10, 1965.

    And if you’d put $16 into the S&P 500 instead of into one share of Berkshire on that same day, your share of the S&P 500 wouldn’t be worth $162,905 today from appreciation (we’re leaving out the dividends for now.)

    In fact, your S&P 500 share wouldn’t be worth $100,000 today.

    It wouldn’t even be worth $10,000 today.

    It would be worth about $600.

    Throw in dividends and you’re north of $1,000 but south of $2,000 on your $16 investment. The Berkshire shareholder has $162,904.

    That’s how good Warren Buffet’s track record really is.”-Jeff Matthews

  10. couragesd says:

    High Home Ownership Can Seriously Damage Labor Market, New Study Suggests
    Government policies that boost the amount of home ownership in a country are likely to inflict severe damage on the labour market, new research from the University of Warwick suggests

  11. jonas says:

    That an econ PhD is the one of the highest paying one shows that econ is nothing more than religion in our modern society, and the PhD is the admission ticket into the priesthood.

  12. willid3 says:

    since big business doesnt invest in people or research, time for step up and do so?

    otherwise the deficit might be smaller, but as percent of GDP be much bigger?