Daron Acemoglu,
Pascual Restrepo, NBER: Secular Stagnation? The Effect of Aging on Economic
Growth in the Age of Automation. Several recent theories emphasize the negative effects of an aging
population on economic growth, either because of the lower labor force
participation and productivity of older workers or because aging will create an
excess of savings over desired investment, leading to secular stagnation. We show that there is no such
negative relationship in the data. If anything, countries experiencing more
rapid aging have grown more in recent decades. We suggest that this
counterintuitive finding might reflect the more rapid adoption of automation
technologies in countries undergoing more pronounced demographic changes, and
provide evidence and theoretical underpinnings for this argument.
Jed Kolko, Indeed
Blog: How the Jobs That Immigrants Do Are Changing. We used the Census’s American Community Survey
(ACS), which asks respondents about their employment status, occupation,
birthplace, and citizenship, among many other topics. We analyzed the data for
all immigrants in the U.S. and then focused on those who have been in the
country less than five years. The punchline is that compared with earlier immigrants, recent
immigrants are more educated, more likely to come from Asia rather than Latin
America, and less likely to work in occupations where they might compete
directly with the native-born workers who were most supportive of Trump.
Prakash Loungani,
IMF: Inclusive Growth and the IMF. More inclusive
economic growth demands policies that address the needs of those who lose out …
Otherwise our political problems will only deepen. Trampoline policies
such as job counseling and retraining allow workers to bounce back from job
loss: they help people adjust faster when economic shocks occur, reduce long
unemployment spells and hence keep the skills of workers from depreciating.
While such programs which already exist in many advanced economies, they
deserve further study so that all can benefit from best practice. Safety net
programs have a role to play too. Governments can offer wage insurance for
workers displaced into lower-paying jobs and offer employers wage subsidies for
hiring displaced workers. Programs such as the U.S. earned income tax credit
should be extended to further narrow income gaps while encouraging people to
work.
Michael Chernew et al.,
NBER: Understanding the Improvement in Disability Free Life Expectancy in the
U.S. Elderly Population. This paper
explores changes in healthy lifespan in the U.S. over time and considers
reasons for the changes. First, we show that healthy life increased measurably
in the US between 1992 and 2008. Years of healthy life expectancy at age 65
increased by 1.8 years over that time period, while disabled life expectancy
fell by 0.5 years. The largest improvements in healthy life expectancy come
from reduced incidence and improved functioning for those with cardiovascular
disease and vision problems. Together, these conditions account for 63 percent
of the improvement in disability-free life expectancy. Third and more speculatively, we explore the role
of medical treatments in the improvements for these two conditions. We estimate
that improved medical care is likely responsible for a significant part of the
cardiovascular and vision-related extension of healthy life.
Derek Thompson,
the Atlantic: Trump’s Populism Is a Fiction. The theme of President Donald Trump’s inaugural address was the return
of power to “the people”—the forgotten Americans, the victims of “American
carnage.” It harkened back to his campaign, when Trump presented himself as a
populist who eschewed traditional conservative-liberal orthodoxies. But despite
the speech’s theme of transferring power from the cosmopolitan rich to the
everyman, his
administration’s emerging economic policy would be an unambiguous transfer of
income and power in the opposite direction: from the public to the rich.
Hunt Allcott,
Matthew Gentzkow, NYU/Stanford: Social Media and Fake News in the 2016
Election. We present new evidence on
the role of false stories circulated on social media prior to the 2016 US
presidential election. Drawing on audience data, archives of fact-checking
websites, and results from a new online survey, we find: (i) social media was
an important but not dominant source of news in the run-up to the election,
with 14 percent of Americans calling social media their “most important” source
of election news; (ii) of the known false news stories that appeared in the
three months before the election, those favoring Trump were shared a total of
30 million times on Facebook, while those favoring Clinton were shared eight million
times; (iii) the average American saw and remembered 0.92 pro-Trump fake news
stories and 0.23 pro-Clinton fake news stories, with just over half of those who recalled seeing fake
news stories believing them; (iv) for fake news to have changed the outcome of
the election, a single fake article would need to have had the same persuasive
effect as 36 television campaign ads.
No comments:
Post a Comment