Some people I admire

From time to time, I'm going to write a bit more about economics. This time I will focus on listing some of the people I've been influenced by over the last year and a half or so (which is when I really began to learn a little economics), and give a brief reason why. One funny consistency amongst all of the following is that they have all been controversial, but creative in a way that seems frustratingly other-wordly.

Ronald Coase: for having the courage to question the (later fully completed) general equilibrium model for failing to describe the forms that firms take in the real world, and making the observation that prices cannot be the only parameters that determine allocation of resources. Also for making the observation (in 1960) that lawyers think about externalities in a more sensible manner than how economists were doing so (back then), another observation that has been revolutionary. These two papers have a combined citation account of ~30,000 - the highest by very, very far.













Oliver Williamson: for pioneering almost (but not quite) in a single handed manner, the field of (what I will call) "Comparative Economic Governance forms in an Industrial sense". The first to give us an analytical framework within which to understand the organization of the firm (and if firms organize at all) - the field of inquiry begun by Coase. Most importantly, for telling us the "firm" (i.e. planning) and the "market" (the "free market") are both flawed ways of organizing, but each can be okay depending on what the parameters of the situation are.













Jim Heckman: for describing a technique to solve the selection problem - some people may earn zero wages because they value staying at home, the ignorance of this problem leads to wrong estimates, thus regression models need to account for this. This is one of the earliest - perhaps the first - examples of the bridge between structural and reduced-form models. The imagination required for this is difficult to communicate.















Peyton Young: for incorporating social norms with (traditional) economic modeling to figure out a equilibrium concept (with Dean Foster) and using it to produce a beautiful, compelling analysis (along with Mary Burke) of the role of custom and competition in the organization of agricultural crop-sharing contracts. One of the most exciting economists around at this time and very active. Unlike your freakonomists, his understanding of sociology mirrors that of Becker's, and the incorporation of the thoughts of other disciplines is done in a systematic manner.



There's lots more, but these are the first four I can think of.

speck of dust in cosmic sand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

the first "habitable" planet has been discovered, suggesting their existence is more likely than previously believed.

but what is the distribution we are sampling from?

it seems odd, this fascination for finding other planets. I've said this before, but there is something extremely sad, extremely lonely and somewhat beautiful in the idea of humans being alone. Something tells me we are the only real "pieces" of life existing...what a terrible plan!

It's raining outside thus the slight melancholy. Time to push off to college the writing up of the prospectus has begun...and the day has just begun, in the temple of the king.

"Try again... must get through
Hear me now...
For I've very little time

Not much time... hear my call
Please get through... I am here..."

The Final Frontier; New Beginnings

Iron Maiden's new album "The Final Frontier". As a major and long-time fan of this band that hasn't ever rested on past efforts, it is perhaps a foregone conclusion that I will say this is an excellent album...

More interestingly, it is the sort of review that this band has started attracting that is interesting.

One point of view is that: "What's with the length of the songs? Why is Iron Maiden doing prog rock? It is a sign of aging, the band is sounding tired etc "

Another point of view: "*snigger* Iron Maiden still around? I suppose 14 yr olds will always be around."

Another: "The long songs are okay but the shorter stuff is better. They should edit a bit more."

Last: "BEST ALBUM EVER. UP THE IRONS. BEST BAND EVER."

My take is that all of these are correct in some ways, and incorrect in others. Iron Maiden is doing prog rock, because being active musicians for 3 decades, they have bothered to learn their instruments. There is a presumption that since some of the thrill on their early albums - Killers, for example - is gone, the band has lost its vitality. I submit that most of those thrills were mostly of a cheap (although enjoyable) nature. Like a standard 12 bar blues thing, it is certainly fun, but as a guitar player you want to do other stuff.

It was always a band that played with long songs and shifting time signatures etc. It is a sign of a coming of age of the band that they now feel confident to pull some of the more interesting stuff off - and they don't do it by sacrificing listening pleasure. This was where the previous album lacked. Although there were patches of close to exceptional (I won't say brilliant) musicianship, as a whole many of the songs felt put together without a flow to them.

Contrast with Dance of Death or Brave New World, where there were 4 to 5 minute songs based off of one good idea (No More Lies is basically a stadium chant disguised as a song - not that there's anything wrong with that!) and 7 to 8 minute songs based off 3 good ideas (Dream of Mirrors, Blood Brothers and Paschendale are exceptions; The Thin Line Between Love and Hate is a very extreme example of a very good idea and a very bad idea in one song).

The major criticism is that this album is "No Powerslave". For the uninitiated, Powerslave is acknowledged as Maiden's best album thus far (by most).

My controversial opinion: many, if not all, are judging the band by their past accomplishments. Although that stuff is certainly very good, I believe the songs were set so rigidly to a pattern, that you could always see the next thing coming. Most songs off Powerslave confirm to this but the underlying melodies were simply exceptional. The succeeding albums worsened these tendencies, leading to a steady decline until the singer quit, one guitarist followed. A couple more forgettable albums followed.

Then the singer and guitarist came back suitably refreshed and with a different mindset. Now, what you have on this album is a much more dynamic band, the music is much more smooth than it has ever been, and save for a couple of songs and a couple of places in other songs, there isn't any place where I can point and say "yes, I knew that".

Now, it is an indication of how much I've grown used to the earlier Maiden, that I believe that this alone is worthy of credit. The ability to surprise is enough I would argue. However, there are a couple more things: the songs do have an urgency to them that was certainly not seen on previous releases. "Mother of Mercy" and "Starblind" are the best examples I can take. Most important, the guitar sound on this is much more alive, and there's certainly a different idea to most of the structuring of the songs.

There is still a little too much dependence on the intro - although even that is being understood better as displayed by the song "Where the Wild Wind Blows" (based off a stop-motion animated British movie in the 80s about a couple that commits suicide believing an earthquake to be a nuclear attack). The intro there is taken into the main verses of the song, which is then followed by a rather rocking rhythm bit, some tasteful soloing and the song ends with the intro. If they hadn't ended with the intro, I would have been happier; but well, this is good enough.

The best example of how people are unable to adjust their perceptions of the songs on this album is the first song: "Satellite 15". This is a tremendous thundering bass and drum driven piece with guitars sounding like parts of HAL, one of the freshest and most exciting things the band has ever produced - and almost everybody seems to hate it! Why? The guitar rhythms and the distorted vocals not only perfectly produce the atmosphere conjured by the lyrics, but the whole damn thing just rocks!

My own guess is that the next album - if there will be one - will display Iron Maiden with even better mastering of themselves. This marks in my opinion, a steady progression you can see in Brave New World, away from the Maiden of old and toward a much fresher, free sound. They've gone back and forth with it over the last decade, but they might just be about to really understand what they want to do. Put "Revelations" against "Mother of Mercy" to see what I mean.

"Trippy"

Old big cloud about to dissolve, the men who stare at goats, well okay, but do the goats stare back?

Where's PETA when you need them? Maybe they will, you know, rise up to protect the right of the goats...the bar yesterday was selling Absinthe, this guy next to me claiming it would send you to Mars or something...nothing much came of it frankly. Miller Lite has had a more profound effect on me. Some girl talking about how she can tell the Starbucks in College Park from the Starbucks on campus, ha yeah right, gosh these people and their fine palates.

No time for a summer friend, no time for the love you sent, seasons change and so did I, you need not wonder why. That's the Guess Who. Jim Morrison could only aspire to the poetry in those lines. Indians bleeding on highways indeed. All the acid was wasted on that guy. Proof that stimulus alone is not enough, that guy, uff, Lizard King. He was looking revolution, talking stupid.

The truly remarkable thing is that the only "stimulus" I'm working on right now is a huge bowl of Haldiram's Bhel Puri. The cool thing about being grown up is that you can crap for dinner. Although I did cook a nice chicken curry for lunch. I wonder if Lemmy ever ate chicken curry. Matter of fact, I wonder if Lemmy eats.

Okay then, computer.

new perspective

So my old headphones gave out and I'm using the cell-phone headphones instead.

This has created a strange, and interesting, difference in the perception of music.

A lot of the trippier stuff (your Strawberry Fields, your Pink Floyds) sounds vastly distorted - the vocals are pushed into the background, like they're singing across a huge auditorium and you can only hear the echoes. (Ha, a pun on a Pink Floyd epic). The instruments on the other hand are pushed into the foreground - this is all culminating in a very different experience.

For the heavier stuff, the bass is pushed almost out of the picture - again creating an interesting dynamic, because it is with the heavier stuff that a bass sounds good. The vocals are completely gone (for some bands e.g. Lamb of God, this is a good thing for me), instead all I can hear are the drums, keyboards and the guitars - but the guitars! The sound is so alive I can almost feel the guitar, I'm almost afraid to play a Hendrix song..! It's like putting your head right next to the amplifier to the virtual exclusion of everything else.

I'm also getting a completely different reading of the songs themselves. Did Jimmy Page really just do that? Keyboards are actually sounding like they belong in "Trampled under Foot"! People, you have no idea how good Iron Maiden are sounding. Three guitars and I can hear them clear as crystal. I can even make out without effort, the scraping of the pick on the strings.

Funny, when you think of it. The actual song itself does not change, neither the person listening, simply the medium has shifted, and an alternate understanding emerges. Mystical.

The earphones are for Nokia's XpressMusic line of phones. The laptop I'm using is an IBM, sorry, lenovo, T61.

Thoughts on America (#1)

Of all people, I wouldn't expect David Lee Roth to tell me something insightful. But that's life. Marked by uncertainty, ruled by surprise.

Talking about the differences in architecture and history between the US and Europe, he says something as follows:

"There's a lot more castles here (England/Europe), a lot more history. A lot more history, period. The United States on the other hand was based on Dodge City. The cowboys in the streets, and the guy who stepped out of line. The people who started the United States were people who were stepping out of line. That approach, very pragmatic, very practical, very day to day."

Say what you will, he actually makes sense to me. There's a fundamental idea here - of being practical - that may be very important in understanding how this country came to be.

Watch, 4:50 minutes onward (the documentary incidentally is a rather bizarre mash up of interview, random scenery and loud British heavy metal bands):

"Bharat Bandh"

I suppose you can call it democratic.

The left and the BJP is happy that the "people" have come out in "protest" though no "formal" strike was called. This shows the people's anger against the price rise, apparently. Forget about the commerce being hit, forget about lives that go out in disarray.

If fuel becomes more expensive, well, what can the government do about it? What the hell's wrong with our political system? How long will you avoid fuel becoming more expensive?

Ugh, and we know this is all being done to get votes by looking "concerned" about the poor.

Although if everyone's income is raised by an equal amount of the price rise, Marshallian demand stays at the same point. So no welfare loss.