Happy Saturday. Here are my longer form weekend readings:

• The Biology of Risk (NY Times)
• Analyzing the AAII Sentiment Survey Without Hindsight (AAII)
• Heart of the Emerald Triangle: In Humboldt County, California, Illegal Marijuana Camps Buoy the Economy and Influence the Culture. Who Wins, and Who Loses, If Weed Goes Legit?  (The Believer)
• How Ronald Reagan Changed Bruce Springsteen’s Politics (Politico)
• The Sprawling, Booming LA Tech Scene Is Having a Moment (Re/Code)
• Lunch with Edmund Phelps (FT.com)
• BuzzFeed’s Jonah Peretti Goes Long (Medium)
• When Michael Jordan Wore 45 (Priceonomics)
• Dixie Zen: Southern Tubing (Oxford American)
• How to Respond to Criticism (The Toast)

Whats up for the weekend?



Retracement of Financial Crisis Losses

Source: Chart of the Day

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.

5 Responses to “10 Weekend Reads”

  1. RW says:

    Tyler Cowen jumps the shark

    The Lack of Major Wars May Be Hurting Economic Growth

    Shorter Cowen: Nations are better governed when facing major conflict because focus.

    NB: If only there were any history in the past two thousand years that could confirm this. Ah well, it sounds intellectually bold, cutting edge even, and so manifestly supportive of both the plutocracy and the military industrial complex that converts and donor dollars are virtually assured; supply side and the Laffer Curve were getting to be old hat anyway.

    • ilsm says:

      Feel for Cowan. He is professor at GMU, which is inside the DC beltway, there is no logic or thinking “inside the beltway”. GMU is a diploma mill for “professionals” working “inside the beltway” where the standards of DVA managers hiding failure are honed to a high gloss and no accounting is ever made of the money spent on war stuff.

      Also US did so good after WW II because: it sold arms to everyone who were bombs to rubble, and after the war had the only industry supplying the reconstructions.

      US has gotten TANG…….

    • rd says:

      I think I would take 2% growth without wars over 4% growth with major conflicts.

      North America has a huge moat that is able to keep the rest of the world largely at bay. Since the Civil War, the conflicts that North America have been engaged in have been on other continents so there was little damage locally. The self-immolation of Europe, Russia, Japan, and China in the first half of the 20th century positioned North America to fill a huge vacuum. Those other countries spent the second half of the century simply recovering from the first half.

      Who knows? Maybe the complete disfunctionality of Congress that means there is little money for transportation infrastructure maintenance and replacement may force that focus, especially at the state level, to innovate and come up with new 21st century solutions.

  2. Bob A says:

    Bidding wars in Eastside’s real-estate marketseattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2023842656_eastsidehomebuyingxml.html