22 Burst results for "Paul Romer"

"paul romer" Discussed on Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

07:07 min | 11 months ago

"paul romer" Discussed on Heartland Newsfeed Radio Network

"I'm steve of it and that was me talking with my mpr. The emmy nominated actress from the big bang theory. We both have. Phd's although neither one of us is really putting them too much. These days after decades doing academic research. I decided a few years back that i needed change. I wanted to think about more practical problems to have some real world impact. So even though i'm not so at home in front of the microphone bullet and i started this podcast. People i mostly admire with the goal of showcasing the ideas of people i admire and also maybe slipping in my own views on the world. Here and there for instance. I'm a firm believer. There should be a lot more quitting. We would all be much better off and it turns out. I'm not alone in that belief. Here's paul romer nobel prize winning economist. The way i've tried to offer advice is by saying there's always something else you can do. So if you reach a roadblock especially if you feel like you're notion of right and wrong is going to require a compromise to get past a roadblock go do something else so i'm gonna call you a quitter and for most people those who would be fighting words. But i think you'll actually be one of the few people who would consider that a compliment. So do you have some insight. Into what makes you such a quitter well. I'd never framed it. The way you in your face description of quitter was a physicist. Before he became an economist he's also worked in silicon valley and was even ever so briefly the chief economist at the world bank a dream job for a lot of people but with the world bank actually tried to quit. I did think it was a waste of time. But i was persuaded that it would be very damaging to the bank of i quit so i figured out. I get myself fired at worked. Do not consider sunk costs in your career. And that is peter attiyah. A boxer turned surgeon. Turned management consultant turned longevity researcher. So i've done a lot of different things and that makes me a master of nothing but life isn't really about necessarily being the master of something in many ways is the advice i give. Everyone is not to be afraid to change. It's just so hard to quit stuff. It might be that. It's the rigidity of thought that is really the biggest problem and the ability to quit or not. Quit becomes a very high watermark to separate those people out. Do you have any advice on knowing when to quit something. We're all familiar with the story of perseverance winning out. I tend to not advocate. That actually and that is nathan myhrvold the former chief technology officer and microsoft and expert on the science. Of course who palmer started out in physics until he ran into a bit of a wall. There's no point in beating your head against a wall after you've given the wall a few good cracks move over to find the software God's sake. I don't mean you should always be a twitter. It's hard to know where that trade off is sort of quit. The life of a typical academic. I started a research center. it's called radical innovation for social change or risk for short. Where a team of us trying to think of ways to make the world better. It's something nathan. Myhrvold has dedicated his life to by starting a big invention firm. And it's not easy. The big frustrations being an inventor. The i just when you can't solve prop on and of course most of your ideas do fail. It takes a lot of integration because you hit on something that really succeeds and this is the second one that you can't get the world's to adopt it having influenced on policies something. We all think that we're in a that's economist. Emily oster a brown university and then it sort of turns out that people don't listen lightly. I hope that they will. Oftentimes an idea isn't enough to win the day and academics have this view that while you have an idea to put it out there and it's not our job to do the implementation that's the job of the people in the field. We sort of lack translational ability. And i think that is something that we certainly don't think very valuable provision rewards creation and publication but not translation. It does a reward. Yeah i can. Certainly empathize with nathan at emily's frustrations in many ways risk is designed to be that kind of intermediary between acedemic ideas and real world application. But even with that focus on the one year anniversary of the center. I sat down to tell you. How many lives we had meaningfully affected. Unfortunately the honest answer was ciro between failed ideas and long legs. getting our occasional good ideas implemented. We had literally nothing to show for hard work. And that's when. I decided to start this podcast. I realized my best avenue for doing good in the world was to bring attention to the brilliant people who in their own different ways were having an impact and the podcast gives the chance to ask those folks the questions. I really want to learn the answers to really curious. If you have any advice advices someone who obviously thinks logically and scientifically about how the minds of people who don't think logically scientifically always say. I'm not trying to change their mind. I'm actually trying to understand how they think and start from there. That's monsef slowly. Who's the chief advisor for operation warp. Speed the us government's eighteen billion dollar effort to fast. Track a covid nineteen vaccine because in order to really convince somebody of something you need to truly exchange views which means understanding why they say something. My advice is a active listening. And be once you have. Some grasp of the problem think of solutions that creates energy and momentum to move forward if you continue describing the problem you stay still. My appetite for debate has diminished more or less along with the realization. That doesn't work all that well. And that is. Sam harris the stanford trained neuroscientist turned philosopher in meditation advocate. Perhaps best known these days as the author of waking up and the founder of the meditation app of the same name is really hard to change. People's mind real time. People tend to change their minds and private. That can count on one hand. The number of times. I've witnessed somebody relinquish fairly core cherished beliefs it's like witnessing a supernova burst or something. I'm surprised you've ever convinced anyone to change a core belief. I can't think of a case. I've ever been that persuasive.

paul romer peter attiyah Myhrvold emmy Emily oster nathan myhrvold nathan silicon valley steve palmer brown university ciro microsoft twitter emily us government Sam harris stanford
"paul romer" Discussed on Bitcoin Radio

Bitcoin Radio

04:56 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on Bitcoin Radio

"Reverend and blockchain is just the operating system for the internet of value. Or what i call the trust net and bitcoin is the first manifestation or the first use case of that technology that was able to survive through the network effect this emergence as a goto technology. In all it's not the best technology you know need to be the best. Paul romer won the nobel prize two years ago. For this exact point the law of increasing returns says. You don't need to be the best you need to be the most popular the most utilized the biggest network effect. And that that's over right and it doesn't mean there won't be other crypto currencies. That are important there will be. It doesn't mean there won't be other blockchain projects that are important. There will be but as far as the currency k. Bitcoin and that doesn't mean theorems less good or less valuable. Theorems a totally different thing. And it's like the internet thing about the internet has five protocols aren't used to have eighty ninety nana's five and they're all different right. Tcp ip is the operating system as the backbone of the internet. Ftp allows you transfer files. Smtp in http websites and email and then there's www dot which is basically a system for building other things on the internet like web pages and blogs or whatever it happens to be. it's a tool same thing with the theory. Material is a tool to program logic on this internet of everything and they can coexist and they can even be symbiotic in their relationship. And this whole maximalist argument back and forth. It's just nonsense right. Let's do the best for each technological innovation utilize it for what it is recognized for what it is and support and champion it for what it is and not getting the you know the pissing match over. You know which one's better you know. This whole defy problem if people all defies bad. No there are bad people doing some bad things in defy no question just like there are some bad people. That did some bad things. That doesn't mean the idea of tokenism at it doesn't mean the idea of decentralized finance bad decentralized finance is going to change the world absolutely unchanged derivative markets train structured. Finance market's gonna tradit- can change traditional markets. All of that is going to be decentralized. All of it's going to be awesome but other going to be people along the way that do bad stuff of course penny stock scams traditional stock scams mutual fund scams. Etf scams. They're all wherever there's money. There will be scams by guys were. They're not disappearing..

Paul romer nobel prize
"paul romer" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

03:52 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"It's a newer award created by Sweden Central Bank in honor. Of Alfred Nobel, but it still comes with a nice bit of cash about $1.1 million. NPR's chief economics correspondent Scott Horsley, is with us this morning. Hi, Scott. Good morning, Rachel happily Happy Nobel Day. Happy Nobel Day. I'm assuming it's not you. You're not going to tell you this thing. So eso. If not you, Scott, what kind of economists tend to get recognized for the Nobel Prize? It varies. Sometimes it goes to something very technical, like how to value and options contract. Other times it's more down to Earth. Last year, for example, the prize went to three researchers in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who've been working on fighting global poverty. Esther do flow was recognized along with her husband and MIT colleague Ajit Banerjee and Harvard's Michael Kramer. Do flow was only the second woman to ever win the economics prize, and she told an early morning news conference that she hoped that would serve as an example. She asked why we're stuck with such horrible choices right now kill people until the economy. It's because we didn't invest in the past by guns or buy guns, But let's not repeat that mistake right now. Let's invest as hard and fast. A CZ vigorously issue 10, so we've got some better choices. That's actually another winner. That was ah Paul Romer, who shared the economics Nobel a couple of years ago. Hey, has been very outspoken about the need for more aggressive testing. During the pandemic so that we can isolate sick people and let more healthy people go about their business. That was Romer talking back in March, when we're all in the middle of the lock down. We just ask, Do we have that other deaf low clip? Let's play that. I hope he's going to spy on many, many other woman to continue walking, and then many other Mento give them the respect. They themselves like every single human being do flow, and her colleagues were part of a team that has worked to bring Scientific rigor to anti poverty efforts. Extreme poverty has fallen very sharply in the last three decades. Unfortunately, the Corona virus has reversed some of that progress, the World Bank said last week. Pandemic is likely to push as many as 150 million more people in the world back into extreme poverty by next year her are there other notable winners Scott that stand out to you in the history of this prize. Yeah, A lot of them once comes to mind is Richard Taylor, who won the Nobel for economics. Back in 2017. Taylor is a pioneer in the burgeoning field of behavioral economics. That's a study that tries to account for our sometimes irrational behavior. A lot of economics kind of operates on the theory that people behave rationally at all times. But Taylor knows that's not the case, and he tries to Account for irrational behavior and maybe harness them for better outcomes. I remember interviewing failure years ago when he was doing research around the bets that contestants make on TV game show deal or no deal. Really. You might remember that. Yeah, it was. It was a big hit in early in the century, and it featured a lot of models walking around with stainless steel briefcases full of money. A top prize million dollars just a little less than today's Nobel Prize winner will receive NPR's economics correspondent Scott Horsley, talking about the Nobel Prize in economics. We will learn the winner later this morning, Scott. Thank you. It took Montana five months to hit 500 Corona virus cases. Now it is seeing more cases than that. Every single day. Hospitals are strained. They're diverting patients. They're setting up new intensive care beds. This is a challenge for Montana's governor, a Democrat who is running for a Senate seat. Here's Rachel Kramer from Yellowstone Public Radio in downtown Bozeman. Laura Cunningham approaches a group of college students wearing masks give.

Nobel Prize Scott Horsley Alfred Nobel Richard Taylor Paul Romer NPR Rachel Kramer Sweden Central Bank Montana Laura Cunningham World Bank Pandemic Massachusetts Bozeman Esther Ajit Banerjee Cambridge Senate
"paul romer" Discussed on AM 1590 WCGO

AM 1590 WCGO

05:01 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on AM 1590 WCGO

"These rich bought heads showing up to Bernie had ray Dalio want to burn it burning man Paul Romer Grover Norquist went to buy love Grover Norquist but you went to burning man like it's when you're doing that it's not punk anymore it's not nobody's call anymore I actually great qual I'll never forget this I was a kid dance on the Coast Guard cutter sweet gum which is since been decommissioned this is the mobile Alabama and I went to the mall with one of the illest the guy's services fireman is name was fireman parks don't know his first name and he was talking about M. T. V. and this was back in nineteen ninety five he says you know the problem with MTV is he's like all these kids watch MTV they see people wearing these clothes and they wear the same clothes and nobody is cool anymore nobody is cool anymore it all started with MTV you know I have back when I was in high school it was funny my freshman year I went to like a public private high school is a hybrid of private and public and since it wasn't on the board of education they basically could serve whatever they want in terms of food and if I went to the cafeteria the first day in there were two options pizza and burgers I went back the second day there were two options pizza and burgers every day that's only served pizza and burgers it was gross it was like discussing food and everybody was down there eating pizza and burgers and I'm like I'm not I'm not doing this so I started like brown bagging my lunch every day and there was this building called the main building and I sat outside on the steps in I eat by myself all year in the winter all times here I would eat outside on the steps so about a year goes by do this by myself and some other people start to join me than some other people start to join me in by senior year there's hundreds of people eating outside it was it was amazing to watch you know not many people are wired this way this is why this is hard you have to it's it's all about not having a fear of being wrong if you're if you're not afraid of being wrong if you're not afraid of being embarrassed then the possibilities are limitless so many so many people in the financial industry are terrified of being embarrassed they're terrified about being wrong on stuff the old tweets something though if they say okay bonds are going up then bonds go down then they'll go and like delete their tweets they're terrified of being wrong I don't care from wrong I I just don't care you know it's it's easier to lose money if everyone is losing money it's hard to lose money if you are the only one to losing losing money I'll tell you what is being amazing being the only one making money which is often where I am so in terms of like where it's punk to invest nowadays it's punk to invest in an actively managed funds everybody's index funds like fifty percent of assets are index funds it's punk to invest in actively managed funds the dollar has been strong it's punk to invest internationally it's punk to pay commissions everybody wants free commissions it's punk to pay commissions it's punk to use financial advisors everybody is do it yourself it's punk to have cash and gold gold gold is a seventeen hundred Bucks plus it has no retail participation whatsoever what no interest absolutely not like out of favor not in consensus or you can follow the herd in the herd is following a bunch of bloggers and journalists on Twitter who know nothing or you can listen to someone who is handled risk his whole life let's think about this for a second year in a hundred percent stocks you lose money along with everyone else do you feel better you have half your money who out there isn't a hundred percent cash years ago this would not be so on common yes you will miss out on gains but a hundred percent cash you also miss out on losses I'm Jerry billion this is the chair doing child WTO now a page from the diary of flow dear diary I got the brush off again I don't get it is there something wrong with the way I wave a little wrist elbow wrist I love that little basset hound acknowledge me I'm friendly I give everyone peace of mind and I protect their homes through progressive should be jumping for joy when I walk by save an.

Bernie ray Dalio Paul Romer Grover Norquist
"paul romer" Discussed on Newsradio 600 KOGO

Newsradio 600 KOGO

08:27 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on Newsradio 600 KOGO

"Accused us the United States of lying through their teeth and suggested the country mind its own business because the war worlds between the world's two biggest economic powers has now escalated the comments came on the heels of president trump suggesting in a press conference that the US would be seeking substantial compensation for China's handling of the global and dynamic and the director of the World Health Organization who said countries that heated the agency's early warnings on the corona virus and now in a better position than those that did not wallow Midian from his remarks any of his agency's own missteps and there were many thermal imaging cameras are the latest devices businesses hope will help re open the economy while keeping people safe from the threat of the covert died teen the cameras are used to scan temperatures from a safe distance and if a fever a common corona virus symptoms detected the company would require further screening or deny the person entry all together resident trouble order U. S. meat processing plants to stay open amid the corona virus they're concerned of course that we're going to be running out of meet soon and a lot of people have been talking about that Howard bloom of course is the expert on the internet in the and also expert on the human mind and I'll ask them to put together is a weekly report on the coronavirus Howard what do you have for so far first of all the number of cases have doubled in less than three weeks we are now at a million over a million cases there been almost sixty thousand deaths and here's what happens when we try to pretend that things are normal seven hundred workers at the Smithfield foods pork plant in Sioux falls South Dakota and tactical rotavirus positive and another hundred we tested positive just today we were forced to have a primary election in Wisconsin on April seventh fifty of the poll workers and the voters who showed up have tested positive for the corona virus eighty percent of Americans now support requiring Americans to stay in their homes according to a P. and only twenty two percent support the anti lock down protesters sixty percent are opposed to those protesters in even among Republicans forty seven percent disapprove of the protesters and only thirty six are in favor but a recent Yahoo gov YouGov's poll revealed some strange cracks in the psychological fortitude that it's going to take to continue the lockdown seventy two percent they're going to have to say they're going to hit the breaking point the full lockdown continues into the summer three hundred percent predicted that they will have a break down if the lockdown last six months and the polls reveal few more resumes and things will not be normal when we get back to normal sixty nine percent are worried about flying sixty two percent are worried about going to restaurants seventy six percent are worried about going on a cruise ship and most important sixty six percent are not comfortable going to a polling place to vote and we have an extremely important election coming in November well our let me ask you this to the most of the people who are testing positive for the corona virus are not showing any signs or symptoms right instead they're spreading the virus so and it's not true that only vulnerable older people with underlying conditions are coming out with this one woman came down with this who pleaded for corona virus testing I was told she was not on the list of the folks of the type who have coronavirus she was thirty nine years old she died a sheriff's deputy asper corona virus testing twice she was in her thirties she died even people nineteen years old are dying young healthy people are dying so we cannot deceive ourselves with the illusion that only the really elderly with really who were really feeble and have chronic conditions are the ones we're going to take the axe the axe is being applied to all of us is the big problem my word we can't continue to shut down this country with this situation because it appears the lockdown which has been going on for weeks now all around the country isn't working people are still getting sick you're absolutely right about one thing we cannot continue the lockdown because we're destroying our economy but Paul Romer who was a highly respected economist he's won a Nobel Prize for economics has proposed a plan in which we would all be tested all of every two weeks what is that allow it allows the isolation of those who are caring the coded or the kid the corona virus so that the rest of us can get back to work thanks for your report Howard and that could be eighty percent of the population right now a top south Korean official believes that north Korean leader Kim John on may have missed the birth Earth Day celebration of his late grandfather in April because of the corona virus pandemic and not because he was ill according to the report who knows with that nation R. grant to a New York not for profit aimed at detecting and preventing future outbreaks of the corona virus from bats has been canceled by the National Institute of health apparently at the direction of president trump because the research involved the Wuhan institute of virology in China he made a good decision there to persuade anyone of anything start by showing them that they are right what do you think of that I thought we check in with our resident psychiatrist Dr Peter Bragan and Peter before we get to the story I want to get your reaction because you've got some things to say about this National Institute of health and the pulling of this grant I don't think we should be paying a wheel on lap either no choice one week ago I brought this up on your show yep and thank you for that because ginger and I were conducting a nationwide campaign to get get information to trump to have been canceled this research which is really collaborative research between the US and China on how to build worst viruses it is bizarre it wasn't just about the supporting the Wuhan institute it's about supporting this bizarre collaborative research is it's crazy and we gave them more money some time ago yes and and that one of our greatest fears was that why not just pick up on this research on themselves with them for themselves without us and that's just with what they've done we just found today research since two thousand fifteen that the Chinese have picked up on their own to create potentially epidemic viruses on their own always with the excuse we're gonna learn more about it and actually making potential weapons and also a potential leak of a dangerous virus so we've we've feeling proud George we think you're a part of it and we think we're a part of trump's cancelling that funding will you keep at it Peter now what about the story that if you want to persuade anyone to do twenty things start by telling them they're right and that's that's a good thing if you want to end up with them being really kind of annoyed with you an angry with hill and Philippe manipulated by you I very much prefer openness I I don enter a conversation with a hidden agenda to manipulate somebody people aren't that stupid they can sense it but also which is not how I would want to be I approach people in my practice of people I'm meeting or people on the air with what I think and and what do you think and let's talk about it not with I'm secretly trying to convince him some all right Peter thank you doctor Peter break in his website of course just part of our Twitter feed it coast to coast AM dot com in a moment dont find joins us again as we talk about in the industry that is making billions we'll tell you about that in a moment on coast to coast AM with.

United States president
"paul romer" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

WNYC 93.9 FM

03:46 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM

"Word or the D. word your pick let's get a Nobel Prize winning economist on the case part of our econ extra credit series Paul Romer is a New York University professor who won the Nobel Prize in twenty eighteen working with the prominent health economist he's come up with two things he says have to happen now doctor Romer thanks for joining us it's great to be here you want people to be safe given everything that's going on but you don't want to kill the economy are these not mutually exclusive ideas no I think there's a middle path it's the one which makes the right kind of balance which involves letting people go back to work if they've been tested recently and shall not have the virus or if they wear protective equipment that protects others and protects themselves if we get the investment done in testing capacity and in better protective equipment we can start sending people to work and do it safely but the protective gear I mean yeah I mean just my masks you talking a moon suits what what on the protective gear the first thing is imagine you work in a grocery store there may be some people who come in who haven't been tested and maybe it's hard for them to get tested right now you may want to wear a protective suit with a face shield mask maybe even the whole body suit just to be certain that you don't get infected by people who are coming into the store now soon what we could shift to it's just you force people the show before they come into the grocery store that they have a negative virus test let's say within the last twenty four hours forty eight hours or if they don't have a recent negative virus test you make them come back to the grocery store wearing their own protective suit these are all perfectly feasible things have we spent ten billion fifty billion a hundred billion dollars in the next few months or a year I mean I had watched all the disaster movies about outbreaks and pestilence and we didn't stockpile these I mean you are an economist I guess it makes sense that we didn't stockpile yeah you know in the textbook world what economists say is if there's a huge surge in the price for the you know the protective equipment it would make sense for a firm to stockpile and hold stuff just on the chance that they'll be able to sell it at a really high price when the emergency comes but the reality is is that people get very emotionally upset and it creates huge political backlash what we call the price gouging gouging improved hearing and that kills the incentive for any firm to stockpile because there's no particular price premium they're gonna be able to sell it out so we need to use a mechanism like we did in World War two where the government buys the capital to set up the production line for somebody who's gonna make you know gear or equipment or make into machines and then the scrap it if were before past the problem in six months or a year and I'm hearing you saying that even though this would cost what normally is a fortune getting this amount of protective gear out to the general population because the economy is at stake it would be worth it oh absolutely we're talking about like trillions of dollars of lost output and hundreds of thousands of lives that could be lost but if we spent a hundred billion dollars right now on protective gear and testing we wouldn't be faced with a choice of where hundreds of thousands of people die or kill the economy Paul Romer is a New York University economist who won the Nobel Prize he's collaborated on this with an economist and medical Dr Alan Garber who's also proposed at Harvard Dr Romer thank you for this it's been a pleasure as part of our.

Nobel Prize Paul Romer
"paul romer" Discussed on KQED Radio

KQED Radio

03:45 min | 1 year ago

"paul romer" Discussed on KQED Radio

"Word or the D. word your pick let's get a Nobel Prize winning economist on the case part of our econ extra credit series Paul Romer is a New York University professor who won the Nobel Prize in twenty eighteen working with the prominent health economist he's come up with two things he says have to happen now doctor Romer thanks for joining us it's great to be here you want people to be safe given everything that's going on but you don't want to kill the economy are these not mutually exclusive ideas no I think there's a middle path it's the one which makes the right kind of balance which involves letting people go back to work if they've been tested recently and shall not have the virus or if they wear protective equipment that protects others and protects themselves if we get the investment done in testing capacity and in better protective equipment we can start sending people to work and do it safely but the protective gear I mean yeah I mean some of masks you talk about moon suits what what on the protective gear the first thing is imagine you work in a grocery store there may be some people who come in who haven't been tested and maybe it's hard for them to get tested right now you may want to wear a protective suit with a face shield mask maybe even the whole body suit just to be certain that you don't get infected by people who are coming into the store now soon what we could shift to is just you force people to show before they come into the grocery store that they have a negative virus test let's say within the last twenty four hours forty eight hours or if they don't have a recent negative virus test you make them come back to the grocery store wearing their own protective suit these are all perfectly feasible things have we spent ten billion fifty billion a hundred billion dollars in the next few months or a year I mean I had watched all the disaster movies about outbreaks and pestilence and we didn't stockpile these I mean you are an economist I guess it makes sense that we didn't stockpile yeah you know in the textbook world what economists say is if there's a huge surge in the price for the you know the protective equipment it would make sense for a firm to stockpile and hold stuff just on the chance that they'll be able to sell it at a really high price when the emergency comes but the reality is is that people get very emotionally upset and it creates huge political backlash what we call the price gouging gouging improved hearing and that kills the incentive for any firm to stockpile because there's no particular price premium they're going to be able to sell it out so we need to use a mechanism like we did in World War two where the government buys the capital to set up the production line for somebody who's gonna make you know gear or equipment or make into machines and then the scrap it if were before past the problem in in six months or a year and I'm hearing you saying that even though this would cost what normally is a fortune getting this amount of protective gear out to the general population because the economy is at stake it would be worth it oh absolutely we're talking about like trillions of dollars of lost output and the hundreds of thousands of lives that could be lost but if we spent a hundred billion dollars right now on protective gear and testing we wouldn't be faced with a choice of let hundreds of thousands of people die or kill the economy Paul Romer is a New York University economist who won the Nobel Prize he's collaborated on this with an economist and medical Dr Alan Garber who's also proposed at Harvard Dr Romer thank you for this it's been a pleasure as part of our.

Nobel Prize Paul Romer
Nobel economist Paul Romer says the path to tech privacy may be taxes

Marketplace Tech with Molly Wood

04:32 min | 2 years ago

Nobel economist Paul Romer says the path to tech privacy may be taxes

"Week. Google showed off lots of new privacy oriented, tools, and products and user agreements at its big developer conference Google. I o apple is marketing privacy Facebook as promising privacy. Eventually federal regulators are still trying to figure out privacy laws and regulations, but Nobel prize winning economist, Paul Romer says company promises and even regulations won't actually change anything because the ad supported business model is what's broken? He argued in the New York Times this week that the US should tax revenue from targeted advertising, we called Paul rumoured to talk more about this idea in quality assurance the segment where we take a deeper look at big tech story. He says companies need to creatively. Evolve their businesses boo ad model was very important it made possible. The emergence of Google and Facebook and supported open source software. So it was very valuable it a crucial point in time. But we've outlived the usefulness of this model we need to move. On what we're stuck in right now is a bad equilibrium. And we got us think creatively about how are we going to get back to the vision? And the optimism that many of us had when we first saw the potential of digital. Well, then tell me more about the creative solutions that they might come up with to change the business model one of the models. That works is a subscription model. People pay to have access to a music service to game supplier of this lots of workable subscription models. If you tax Adra eventually it'll be in the interest of these firms to develop subscription models. The other thing that is if you make that tax on the ad revenue. Progressive what happens is you're gonna end up with a version of the remember the marriage penalty onto p with income get married and their total tax Bill goes up with progressive taxation. We want a marriage penalty in the market because if two firms joined together, we want their total tax Bill to go up because we don't want more big firms would actually. Like to have lots more small ones. So really creative innovative firm that keeps you know, developing new products, it can just off independent firms get the value when it when it's been those off and keep the total tax Bill though by not letting any one of them get too big. There is I wonder what you there is. Also, an argument though, that subscription models are themselves kind of inherently regressive, and that increasingly actually we're finding that access to good information is almost based on your income level. And I wonder what what your responses to that? If this would put information services out of reach. I'm sorry. I just have trouble with this idea that these firms her in jeopardy tens of billion dollars for a relatively small number of people were doing this as a an effective policy for redistribution. Just I just don't think that that argument you passes the left. That's not what I'm arguing. I'm just saying that a lot of information is now stored within these platforms that people may no longer be able to access if they have to pay for it. But but look I mean who who really provided the world's information to everybody on earth Wikipedia. Right. And if you're asking what could we do to make the digital world work for people? You know, the Wikipedia model is great. It's a donation model a subscription model would work a combination of subscriptions and donations on all of those things are possible. This ad model is not helping the users and or they wouldn't be called users. And it's not helping the most vulnerable users. Either is the business model the problem here. Or is it the scale is that the size of these companies always both, but the point of progressive revenue tax is that you create incentives both for breakup, you can allies. The acquisitions and you encourage the development of models where the customers are customers. And they know what they're giving up and they can compare that with the services they get back. I'd rather live in a world where firms don't have these enormous incentives to spy on individuals. So if we had that at advertising model that didn't involve all of this, you know, deep surveillance of individuals. I'd be more comfortable with that. I still think a firm that's collecting revenue on that scale is probably not a healthy thing for a society where we want to have competition and free discourse. And you know, freedom to take unpopular

Paul Romer Google Bill Facebook Nobel Prize New York Times Apple United States Developer Adra Billion Dollars
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:28 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"Removing restrictions on minimum apartment sizes, whether those could could lower the the entry price for starting starting apartment, if I can kind of push this point, more broadly. I think this is much much bigger question in more important than most people recognizing suppose that people spend a constant percentage of their income on housing like third or something through it rent or mortgage payments, and so forth. That means that you know, a ten percent increase in income means ten percent increase in spending on unsure space. So then the demand for what will people willing to play the demand for space and urban areas is going to grow at the rate of growth of urban income urban income will grow, partly because income per capita grows. Also in the developing world because a lot of new people will move into urban areas. So then if you project forward. What's the rate of growth of urban income and ask is there? A mechanism for supply could keep up with that Ridha growth. It's really scary there just isn't. And so on the with business as usual we're going to face. I rocket increases in the price per square meter of floor space in urban areas and with minimum apartments. I mean, people are going to see segregation where people levels of skill or not going to be in those those places. So I think the whole world needs to start paying attention to this simple market for floorspace urban forces. What's the demand? What's his supply for floorspace? And then look at these questions about restrictions on building building hype son expansion the city through that lens of what would it take to have an increase in supply that could meet the the increase in demand and keep the price of force base, constant it's a it's a very sobering. Sedaka? Calculations related social phenomenon that that just makes it worse is another one of my favorite little known facts, which is that the marriage agent. And I'd states is rise risen quite a bit and the marriage rate, especially among low skilled, low -cation people who have finished high school or have only finished high school has fallen off the table, which means that if you're not married, if you're married you have children, you could imagine living in the suburbs. You could imagine wanting to commute if you're if you're saying though, you tend to want to be in the city for whole bunch of reasons, and there's a lot more people trying to do that. Four. Well, I mean, it should say that I'm if I have his colleague Lambert. Oh, by the way, has a great book out about revolutionize. I think urban urban design schedule on the schedule recontact ball L aunt tells me about this little apartment that he and his wife moved into Paris which was tiny when they were young couple. But yet they loved it when they lived there, and we have to remember. You know, the thing about dormitory housing is like for our own children ocean. You gotta share bathrooms two people are in Bubba. You know, we think it's fine when kids go to college, and we think it would be like, you know, like a crime if somebody had to live in that of college, but we ought to be a little bit more open minded about these things. But that on this point about, you know, historically, the only way to have a growth in the supply urban force base. That keeps up the demand is a very big expansion and built or area. This is my take away from that. You didn't get some you know, extra floorspace by building taller in the center. But the bulk of the digital place is gonna come from expansions and built area and Paris and London grew by a factor of about two hundred and built area over about two hundred years, and we dealt with that he's got a lot bigger and they're both perfectly livable exciting cities. But. Reasons that are really hard understand is very widely shared belief that cities shouldn't expand anymore. And if you don't let cities expand that's where we're headed for a crisis. But we just let cities expand. And it doesn't have to be all of them. If once that he doesn't expand while fine. Let the other ones expand. But if all of your city, stop expanding you're really gonna I think face a crisis. My guess today has been Paul Romer Paul thanks for

Paris Paul Romer Paul Lambert London ten percent two hundred years
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

03:27 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"It's like no comment a lot of really tasteless and Mecom dark jokes to make and I'm but I'm not gonna make them close. And I want to talk about cities because I know that's something that you think about increasingly, and I've argued well, let me ask it in a couple a couple of things you can just opine on them because I'm sure you thought about a great deal. One is the fact that people in cities seem to be more productive. And it seems to be an example of the complementarity and Senator between is that you have who have spent a lot of time working on. And I've always wondered as skeptic whether some it's just the people who go to the cities to be the more productive ones. Gif thoughts on that. Yeah. You know? That's that's a question. We can ask empirically their dress in prickly at again, I think this should always be with this spirit of humility that were we're often just seeing a piece of the puzzle. But you can look at for example movers. People who move from Earl area to the city and see. So the what was there say like what was the rate of growth of their wages? Ruler was Riddick growth in the city and sort of holding the individual affect constant Transi. What's different niece? These two environments. There's a little bit of evidence that you holding the individual affects constant people's wages. Grow faster in cities, even grow faster. The bigger city is the faster the growth. So that's just something about like a potential for learning. It's it's greater in in cities. I think this general approach looking at ways changes over the life cycle is something that we should be doing a lot more of. Because there's a lot of learning that goes on when people in the job. So it's really that. They're better jobs is just like there's some schools that are good, and some that are bad sort of itching valuable things some jobs that are better. Some that are worse. And it may be that cities on average tend to have more of the better jobs, but we really should be fair. What are those better jobs, and how can we get more of those? And then, you know, it's really secondary to their where the where they tend to locate. I do think that we did one of the empirical projects we did at the Bank was look at these what they called mincer Russians look at wages as a function of how many years of education yet. And then how long have you been on the job and this increase in wage with time on the job, which you can interpret as a sign of learning people move. It isn't just a contract with one firm wages grow faster by about a percent per year in a urban area in the developing world than a rural airy. So the suggests big advantages to moving people from rural urban, but then if you compare the developing countries, a whole with the richest countries wages grow about a percent per year faster in rich countries than in the developing countries, say like urban urban, you get another point so urban environments in the developing world are somehow not offering the same opportunity to learn and experience wage. Gross that somebody could get moving to another country, and this is actually a little bit disappointing for me because I thought we might be able to get more by just encouraging renovation within these Felton countries..

Senator Felton Earl
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:46 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"This is this oughta make you worry. And I also think that in science the burden of proof for integrity lies with the individual not with me. This is not a case of, you know, a legalistic right to do a job until you know, the definitive proof that they're not qualified women in a certain pattern of facts merged that raised doubts in my mind about know, the integrity of some of the people involved minute is that in my job. As a scientist is the I have concerns about the integrity of this process. Now, let's pull back from the fact about what happened in Chile. What you know? How's the doing business report constructed? I mean talk about the way the Bank responded. They commissioned an audit. They described on maybe Simeon described as he was talking about that particular. This was for the again, November twenty seven. I think it was before maybe not. But yeah. Yeah. That was before you. So they commissioned an audit which has a report was by. Got him. We forget Randall Mark has a report the rental wrote, which is which is pretty reasonable, basically says we don't think rumors, right. But. But the Bank did not release the underlying work that Randall had done looking at the different indices like when I left the Bank. I actually taught myself python and put the code out on the internet and said, look, here's how you could construct the doing business index Chile without changing the components that go into the index. Here's how they actually do it noticed the difference that there's virtually no change in the extra chilly, if you don't change the components in the index. And so I didn't even take a phone call from Randall when they were looking at this because I thought they should do the report on everything I had done on this issue was publicly visible. That's the way it's supposed to work in science Bank wrote this report, which was the basis for a summary by Randall, which was the basis for PR, you know, a press release which said, oh, you know, roamers wrong. There's no problem here. They would not release the underlying analysis, and I just think that's. Kind of the. Indicative of all of the problems with the intellectual culture at the Bank. And I think the questionable value of the stuff that they call research that you know, I think you just can't trust if they're going to comply with the most basic kind of practices about transparency nothing sensitive about these numbers. And it was really just a question of how you weight them when you can prove these indices, and basically their criticism be chilly was basically, look it when you change all the components in the end ex all these countries are moving up and down all the time. So there's nothing unusual about Chile. I still was a little worried about the, you know, the direction -ality, but still there is a kind of a problem here. But the fact that they wouldn't release the underlying data is I think really telling point quick thing. I wanted to ask you before we when we're talking before about macroeconomics. Did you learn anything from the great recession? Do you think the professional learned anything? Well. I think the first thing is I think we've learned some humility. I think we we did not intimate the severity of the crisis. And so the confidence we had before the crisis was misplaced. We should have been more in a more humble about how much we really knew. I think we've also acquired more data which suggests that the financial sector is very dangerous and the cost of the world are extraordinarily high. I I mean, it sounds like a joke. But I actually mean it literally I think if you quantify the losses from the financial sector and set them along side the losses of nuclear power. The sector's done much more harm with its accidents. The nuclear power stunned, and why is it that we have such radically different presumptions about the role of regulation or these two these two industries the answer to that. Love quoting..

Bank Chile Randall Mark Simeon science Bank scientist
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:25 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"So you tell them what you know, you bring an experts who fill in the details that can be a very valuable function ended. It may have been critical to the path that China took towards the rapid gross that it's it's enjoyed. I should mention that you know, the other thing Deng Xiaoping did was create these special zones of which Sinjin was I think the most successful really the four only engine success which engine was a phenomenal success. And so having people who told them, this is how you manage inflation. If you liberalize and in this separate idea about we're going to try and reforms on those things where the the keys in them in China, but hug factor the Bank. The question is how many times as it actually served that function? There are lots of reports that keep the Bank. Use. There's a lot of talk about we have to be engaged and ongoing loan projects. Sure that somebody else could finance this bridge instead of us. But if we're engaged we know the context will be ready to provide advice, but I was actually very disappointed at how hard it was anybody to come up with a case where the pink actually provided useful advice, which changed the policy direction. And in a way that was that was benefit. We had two guests on. About a year and a half ago. Simon Jan cough and met Werner talking about the doing business report that the World Bank produces in. It's an attachment attempt to quantify the business climate the ability to cut through red tape. They -bility to open a business things that are basic, and you know, there's a one can debate whether those kind of the two it was Simeon. Yes. Thank you doing. And then Then. we wonder who's the head of the atlas he's not a World Bank person. He's the head of the atlas network which would. Free market think tanks outside the United States in the world. Okay. And their fans of that report. And and I'm I'm not in general fans of that kind of aggregate, and I'm not a fan of the freedom measures, particularly nice friends of mine work on those in God bless them. But I don't those are fraught with measurement challenges, and he's manipulated. And you got entangled with some of that. So talk about okay. Well to put this in the larger context, I remember I was ready to leave the Bank. I had a concern about a fact that I think needed to be out in the open and be transparent and part of how I when they said you can't resign. I'm just going to newspapers talk about my concern. And then they said, and then they said you have to resign. Well, that's what I wanted to do. So, but here was it was the fact I I was worried about the possibility. Ability that some kind of ideological political views had distorted the numbers that were reported a from in the doing business report in particular. I was very worried about a pattern in Chile where again could have been just random chance. But doing business ranking moved down, you know, every year when the party of the centre-left was in control and moved up every year when the party of the center right was in control. Clan policies. Right. Well, but if what what turns out is if you hold the mirrors of what's going on in Chile constant. I'm all those changes virtually all those go away. So it's like saying, okay Chileans are weaker this year because they can only do twenty push ups, and you say, wait a minute last year. You said Chileans were the Stringfellow because it was chips instead of push-up since while we're using push ups this year. And then it's, you know, it's, you know, it's like lunges your after they kept changing the the measures that went into this doing business ranking in if you just hold constant imagers, most of these changes went away. So good. Yeah..

World Bank Stringfellow China Deng Xiaoping Sinjin United States Simon Jan Werner
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:38 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"And I think that is actually intellectually bankrupt. But I'm curious what you think Paul well bankrupt. I might attorney like distance myself from the like the judgmental or moralistic kind of on the table there. But the equivalent thing when we could say is that it it's unrealistic or it's inaccurate to say that the summaries that most people provide of data are free of beliefs about policy or free of beliefs about the underlying causal mechanisms. So I think we need to be skeptical of people who say oh my data summary. You know activities were, you know, penalty free model free. Policy free and just you can just take my results in work at work with them. I think we need to look carefully at all the steps in the constructions data and just basically look empirically to see what if a bunch of different people went through the same process of summarising, the data would they all come into the end. They were supposed to invest case they were working independently would they all come to the same results. And if not why not and then trying to figure out what what we need to do to reflect the lack of consensus about how to summer, it's well said, I I probably mentioned this before on the program. But I was once I don't go to many seminars anymore. But I was at one recently where someone made some rather bold claims about the magnitude of some relationship between say the financial sector and change ADP or growth rates, and I found them unlikely implausible, but that doesn't matter. I just but I asked that innocent question, I said, how many regressions did you run to get that result? I don't want an. I don't know. I don't want to hear why these are the right? Variables yet. It'd like to hear that too. But before we get there just like how many did you run? Did you run twelve thousand three hundred and eventually I know how and I asked how many of them found this result because it's okay? If if you do three hundred and two hundred ninety five show the same thing, it's just a question magnitude, and what else is in the in the soup. But otherwise, I kinda see it was in the kitchen. How did he take question? He or she. Hey, and he was shocked. Really taken aback by it. But I wrecked to all young economists out there listening in who would go to a lot of empirical seminars than I do. Please ask that question. Let's let's turn to the your experience. Two things one. I'm gonna make a plug for a book by a colleague colleague at Berkeley, Ted McGill, Ted and his co authors have a new book about really kind bring more transparency and reproducibility to to social science, and it's it's just coming out from Berkeley. And it's it's great because it's very practical and pragmatic. It just says here's some things we could do keep track of for example, how much you know, pre-testing has been done on the data. How can we, you know, reset our, you know, standards of significant in light of pre-testing, and I think with technology. There's actually a lot of ways to do do more on this on this stopping. So so I can't I can't remember the name of the book, but a hits coming out at your interested in your word. You know, people should be worried about these these issues. I think I at some point it could become a vulnerability for all of social science. If you know if we keep keeps coming out that there's weaknesses in our empirical methods, or you know, things that aren't reproducible then like the whole integrity of our, you know, our disciplined gets called into question. Here's a title, transparent and reproducible social science research who could be against that. Well, you know, a long time ago. Ed Lima wrote a paper called taking the con- out of a condom attracts, and it should have transformed Heracles economics and did not he's you know, he's still work at it. Can't hurt. I wanna turn to the World Bank. You were there for about a little over year year and a half or so you're a quarter..

Ed Lima Paul Berkeley attorney ADP World Bank Ted McGill
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:33 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"But one of the frustrations over my career, and you kind of know these guys that were friends class. Mates. You know, I like them as people one of my frustrations has been this failure to engage win. Someone like me raises. The question about the logic of argument or the telling thing for me about the pseudoscience. Here was the in attention to data. They just stopped letting evidence be the, you know, the decider of what's going on in the world theory, somehow became the, you know, the definitive way too stylish what's going on. I felt like was I felt like there was just a unwillingness to even engage with will intended. Critique. And so, you know, the the assertion that this poll pattern of behavior was unacceptable and the use of sarcasm was my attempt to. To really coal attention to this in say, it's if I'm right? This is a very serious problem. We need something about it. I because it's it's kind of like somebody pulls the fire alarm if you do it, and it's a false alarm personnel to pay. And so I think there's a consensus that I was just flat out wrong and not just wrong. It's good macroeconomics. But I was wrong cues them. Not engaging science. I should I pay a big reputational price for that. I really think that just don't want this to be an everyday thing. But on the other hand, I do feel like I think, I'm right? And I think it's something deserves deserves some attention. And unfortunately, I think deserves attention even if it hurts the feelings or upsets people that I like in care about I think what we're doing is is more important than to start our feelings. And whether we get the right answers. Really matters. So I have a similar issue. And I don't I don't know if you wanna weigh in, and I'm just gonna mention it and a little bit of a confession my listeners who heard me bring this up any times. I think it's come to be commonly believed by the public and by vary sought journalists, and at least on paper, many, brilliant communists, that the average American has made no economic progress for the last forty years, and there's data to support that of course. And I argue that data's flawed in. That's an interesting question. You can debate how flawed it is whether the CPI's Berkeley measured the rate of inflation, the problem, I have is that there are other data that show progress, and that's I just doesn't engage. It doesn't put it in their paper might be an note they might say to play out. So and so has done made some different assumptions say about thinking about say the growth in. Equality? We quote, everyone knows is grown dramatically. And yet if you make different assumptions about family size, and how you measure non monetary benefits fringe benefits and other things you get a it's not like, oh, you know, it changes by ten percent. You get like a two-thirds reduction. So it really matters. And if you're scientists, you shouldn't just say, oh, they're other opt- their other paintings or data even mention them. You should be grappling with them and trying to understand why get different results in one of sumptious than another. And I don't want to accuse those people of having an agenda, and I hate that that's the ad hominem side. And and I don't even wanna cues them of of being wedded to their own series. Which is part of what you were writing about that after a while become religious about about the beliefs. You have about how the world works in which would be otherwise be a science. But it's it's scary because it matters. Well, I think the kinds of things when do any area is I try and do a kind of a census in NC. Do we think it's possible to have a consensus about the facts that we might wrecking? We don't have a consensus yet. But is that possible there exist facts, and we could reach a consensus about those. I think if people don't agree on that. Then you really got trouble. I think in this area. I think people would agree. I'm betting that in some cases..

Berkeley NC forty years ten percent
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

03:09 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"Is a very funny effect on me because it sort of like hit me like a like a jolt of electronic which was. Yep. What are these productivity shocks? These things are just kind of like made up in the models. And so I started calling in the paper like flip phlogiston was like imagine anything in physicist referred to at some point. And it it made me realize that there was something really deeply wrong. I think with the style explanation their NFL responsible in some sense as macro-economists I didn't do business cycle theory. But I, you know, I have I'm a macro economist, I have some responsibility for the profession, I think others of should have been critical of the style explanation long before the time when this was assistant was was raised for me. So I shifted from my kind of critique that was specific to grow theory in math into critique of how macro-economists the, you know, kind of default leading a group of macro-economy profession were doing their work. And. Big made what what is a I think very harsh critique of their approach that it was not just that they were coming to the wrong answers. But more in a more fundamental sense. They were not following the practice of science. They had really departed from science. I called it pseudoscience. And I think this is this is really a version of ad hominem attack. You know, it's the kind of criticism you don't want to make lightly. You don't want to encourage, you know, easily. But on the other hand, if you think you've gotten to the point where this is what's going on? I think other members of the profession have responsibility to. You know? Raise their hands and say we need to stop. And and look at this. So in that, and I should be clear that paper I still haven't published because it was so critical. It's was in circulated draft form, but it still is out the journal much like the publish it. I think I need to go ahead, and publish it. But I only said that I think the problem macro is not just that the answers are wrong. I think they've stopped doing science and give some illustrations of what I thought about that. I also did something I've never done before the paper, and I generally disapprove of which is to use sarcasm as a way to criticize the results of this group to biding, hyper to a little bit acerbic not I've seen worse, but it's got a little bit. But I generally don't like that easy recourse. That's just like, I don't like at hominem argument. But one of the frustrations over my career, and you kind of know these guys that were friends class. Mates. You know, I like them as people.

physicist NFL
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

02:40 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"But I just don't see any reason why Canada couldn't create up in a. Twenty by twenty you know, square mile zone someplace in the world and say, let's let's create a place. People could live to a move to live in work, organ and say how it goes. And it just such a thought provoking idea thinking about areas of the United States that are struggling economically. West Virginia say or rural Ohio parts of Kentucky places that have lost say industries, coal mining and other activities used to be productive the people who used to do those things for reasons that we might talk about stay. Instead of leaving and their opportunities quite diminished as a result. They don't migrate to where there's more opportunity. So it's not. But I don't think the the problem is is that they've got bad norms. They're just the people. Who skills the people who are there have low levels of skills? And there's nothing there to enhance those skills now Amazon has has changed a little bit. Amazon has put, you know, warehouses in low density places because lands cheap, and they they put some stuff in the middle of nowhere or you could put a you know, a server farm in middle of nowhere. But it's not Hong Kong. Well, I think one temptation that you know, I have to resist an everybody should resist is this. You know, I have Amer I wanna go. Find a nail kind of nomin. I don't think sort of cities is the right way to think about any kind of policy was sponsored to West Virginia or other places where there's some distress. But on the other hand, it is the case that there are hundreds of millions of people who say they would leave. They wanna leave this year from they wanna leave the society that currently they've been so I think that is this demand worldwide, we should think about trying to accommodate somehow, and the, you know, there's there's obvious concerns about this charter city proposal, there's reasonable people. I think should have been calms about setting something like this up. But I think we have to ask ourselves. What's the alternatives that could that we would let us off? For in some humanitarian way an option to people who wanna leave very very dysfunctional dangerous environments, and I think it's very hard to come up with some feasible alternatives to this of the scene..

Amazon West Virginia Canada Hong Kong United States Kentucky Ohio
"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

EconTalk

04:18 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on EconTalk

"So however, kind of go about their work, and what they measure what data they look at much the ticks, they consider and so forth. I think it would be good. If we could at least allow for the possibility that makes sense to say as the science. It would be good. If we could invest in more values of this type, like more, courtesy or more more value on a reputation for honesty. Now, it still leaves you with some practical questions like can you actually change values in a social context, it's hard? But you know, if one could and historically I think societies have sometimes it's important to be able to talk about the real benefits that could come from different sets of, you know, prevailing moral beliefs. I think they matter of time. And I think all that's correct. Except for maybe the last part, which is. Implication, we could do something about it. I think it's I think most people would agree that it's better to live in a world of trust than a world without trust. If people are generally, honest about trust each other. It's alternate. Right. 'cause cheaters explained that in the world of trust is great for cheaters. And there's two Peters the trust of apparatus. But I think most of us agree that those those intrinsic motivations are often much more effective than extra sick. Once. Whether you know, it's prices are punishment or very types of cost benefits that that we might impose on each other. I think the challenge is like you said we we don't really know how to get there from here. And we might disagree about what they are and so- civilization. It seems to me is just the attempt of what we would normally call market forces. But they're not typical ones their norms and social pressures, various kinds ideologies movements fiction, all kinds. Of stuff that affects how people get the world. And then things emerge out of that that some work better than others, the ones that were better tend to create better societies, but it's a pretty blunt system. She could have pretty functional society that works for a long time where the little trust and people struggling suffer. If they were relative to a different equa liberate right within their that culture. But is not much to do about. It's pretty hard to change. We don't understand better rate. It says we don't understand that process for. Well. If we did maybe we could do something about it. Well, I can draw link to charter cities for minute. This was part of it was on my mind. I was thinking about charter cities. And let's give what they Arctic examined. For people who don't. Okay. But but I set it up. So let's imagine let's take a people in Greece. After the midst of the crisis. It's quite possible that most people in Greece would say to themselves. I would really rather live in a society where everybody feels like it's right to pay taxes, and they feel shame. If they don't end if is uncovered that somebody didn't pay taxes, there's social, you know, disregard loss of status for that person. Now, a personal in Greece might type, but I don't live in that society. If I just try and pay my taxes and people find out they'll think I'm an idiot, and I don't know how to change them. And so they might say boy, there's nothing we can do about fact that you know. So it's everybody thinks you should pay taxes in Greece. They don't, but but what we have to think about now is not so much competition within one of these equal area but competition between people can move from Greece to Switzerland. We. We know that when you take somebody who had like the Greek values that hey, it's it's kind of a game to cheat. And everybody thinks you're cool. You move that person Switzerland and pretty soon they're going to think it's bad that she'd on your taxes, and they're gonna think you're supposed to wait for the light to say, you know, walk before you cross the street. So so I think you need to start thinking about competition between different social groups to think of these dynamics of of norms. Now, what was the idea of charter cities?.

Greece Peters Switzerland Arctic
"paul romer" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

C-SPAN Radio

01:39 min | 2 years ago

"paul romer" Discussed on C-SPAN Radio

"I mean government is this radical concept is actually supposed to serve the people, you know, rather than the other way around. So there are lots of. Ideas, better ways to do things that come. But it does require. Not tweaking the system you can't go into a jungle with a pair of sheers and make it into a kind of a straight boulevard. Paul Romer, the recent Nobel prize winner is made this point that basically the only way you succeed with failed institutions is you create a new is to to you keep the constitution you keep the goal. She congress you keep congress, but congress by talking about congress, really. Needs to go back. One point committees had much more power. You have twenty people. And those twenty people could get together, and they basically have the authority to decide how something worked or didn't work. Well, that's a manageable number now all the powers in the leadership and the leadership is completely preoccupied with making the other leader, look bad. So nothing happens. Yeah. Come this past February twentieth for the powers author of the book. Try commonsense conversation with Nora Walker who's the president of New York public radio. More of this conversation is available on our website at C hyphen, spin dot org. WCS from Washington coming up next on book, TV and pan radio..

congress Paul Romer Nora Walker Nobel prize New York president Washington
Nobelist Says System of Science Offers Life Lessons

60-Second Science

03:13 min | 2 years ago

Nobelist Says System of Science Offers Life Lessons

"This is Americans sixty seconds science. I'm Steve Mirsky the benefits from science as they show up in our daily lives are just enormous, but I want to transfer you that right now science can do something for us. Give us a kind of hope that goes beyond just those benefits Paul Romer. He showed the two thousand eighteen Nobil will Morial prize in economic sciences. Romer spoke April night that the National Academy of sciences in Washington DC at an event honoring tenuous Nobel and Calveley prize laureates. Now, there's nobody who's got benefits as direct and his immediate as Jim Jim Ellison who was also there and who shared the two thousand eighteen Nobel physiology or medicine for his work that led to new drugs against cancer when you can show there are people alive now because of the discovering you've made that just you know, that trumps everything most of us create benefits in an indirect way. And they come. All steps. So they're harder to perceive warmer than cited. William Nord house with whom he shared the two thousand eighteen economics prize Bill has this beautiful paper that measures a particular type of benefit which is asking how much light and luminaires can somebody get from an hour's worth of work. And roughly speaking from say, the beginning of the Neolithic revolution up to say, the time of the founding of the National Academy. That's about twelve thousand five hundred years ago to eighteen sixty three that went up by a factor of twenty people just bump into things they discover things so twenty times more light. But from the time of the founding of the kademi until now it's gone up by factor twenty thousand so one hour of work translates into twenty thousand more luminaires of light than it did. The time this this institution was founded, so those benefits are just huge. And we need the by the way, it's it's the system of science that made those very rapid ones possible. Not just curiosity not just random search. So they're huge benefits. But right now, I think there's more anxiety about how we're going to interact with each other as people than there is about just can we keep having more material of benefits, and here thing science is maybe even more important because it's very unusual community of people draws on people from all backgrounds from all over the world and unites kind of common purpose, and we get things done because we insist on things like truth and honesty, and we can trust each other because of that instead insistence, and we welcome people in to that community. If you're willing to live by those those norms, and we ask you to leave. We don't pay any attention to if you don't live by those norms. And the goal is really one of offering benefits that can be shared by everybody. So if you think about kind of like the hope for humanity scientists model of what we can accomplish. But who we can be and how we can be with each other for scientific Americans sixty seconds science. I'm Steve Mirsky.

Paul Romer Steve Mirsky Jim Jim Ellison National Academy Of Sciences National Academy Washington Calveley William Nord Sixty Seconds Twelve Thousand Five Hundred Y One Hour
Nobel Prize, Paul Romer and Florida discussed on Bloomberg Best

Bloomberg Best

00:15 sec | 3 years ago

Nobel Prize, Paul Romer and Florida discussed on Bloomberg Best

"In Florida the Nobel prize in economics has been awarded to one American who has studied the economics of climate change and to another whose research on. Ecological innovation raised hopes that human beings are creative enough to do something about it. The one million dollar prize went to Paul Romer of

Nobel Prize Paul Romer Florida One Million Dollar
2 Americans win Nobel for working climate, tech into economic analysis

WBZ Morning News

00:21 sec | 3 years ago

2 Americans win Nobel for working climate, tech into economic analysis

"The Nobel economics prize has been awarded to to academics with ties to MIT Yale. Professor William Nord house and NYU's Paul Romer work knowledge for their respective work at integrating climate change and tech innovations into macroeconomic analysis. Both of them did their graduate work at MIT secretary. General Gordon Hanson of the Royal

Professor William Nord General Gordon Hanson Paul Romer MIT NYU Secretary
2 Americans win Nobel for working climate, tech into economic analysis

WBZ Morning News

00:30 sec | 3 years ago

2 Americans win Nobel for working climate, tech into economic analysis

"Today to Americans have been awarded the Nobel economics prize. William Nord house of. Jail Paul Romer of NYU or acknowledged for their respective work in integrating climate change and tech innovations into macro economic analysis secretary general Goran Hanson of the Royal Swedish Academy of sciences making the announcement today. This year's price is about innovation climate at economic growth, both will share and a one million

Royal Swedish Academy Of Scien Paul Romer Goran Hanson William Nord NYU