Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Iranian tiger parents

At the same time in June that [Uber CEO] Mr. Kalanick was noisily being ejected from his company, [Expedia CEO and soon-to-be Uber CEO Dara] Khosrowshahi had a problem of his own — his parents. Glassdoor, a site where employees rank their companies, released its 2017 list of the top chief executives. Mr. Khosrowshahi’s score had dropped.

His parents weighed in with that combination of celebration and criticism that many immigrant children know well. As Mr. Khosrowshahi reported on Twitter, his mother said, “Nice! You made the top 100!” But his father pointed out: “#39 is good but you were #11 in 2015.” ...

[Parents] Lili and Gary are clearly watching their son rise to their own expectations. After he was interviewed by Jim Cramer, the host of the financial TV show “Mad Money,” in May, Dara posted on Twitter: “didn’t screw it up (according to mom).”
--David Streitfeld and Nelli Bowles, NYT, on immigrant parents

Saturday, August 26, 2017

MI6's theory on Trump's kompromat

I can tell you what the veterans of the S.I.S. [the British Secret Intelligence Service, or MI6] think, which is yes, kompromat was done on [Trump]. Of course, kompromat is done on everyone. So they end up, the theory goes, with this compromising bit of material and then they begin to release parts of it. They set up an ex-MI6 guy, Chris Steele, who is a patsy, effectively, and they feed him some stuff that’s true, and some stuff that isn’t true, and some stuff that is demonstrably wrong. Which means that Trump can then stand up and deny it, while knowing that the essence of it is true. And then he has a stone in his shoe for the rest of his administration.
--Ben Macintyre on three-dimensional espionage chess

Friday, August 25, 2017

Economists and chivalry

The age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever.
--Edmund Burke, 1790, "Reflections on the Revolution in France," on a long tradition

Sunday, August 20, 2017

Popular music is too slow now on average

Yakov Vorobyev, who invented a popular app for DJs called Mixed in Key, used the program to analyze the 25 most-streamed tracks on Spotify in 2012 and 2017: He found that during that period, the average tempo dropped by 23 bpm (to 90.5 bpm) and the percentage of songs above 120 bpm fell markedly from 56 percent to 12.5 percent.

Part of the slowing is due to the continuing dominance of hip-hop, which now permeates every branch of music, even longtime holdouts like rock and country. "Hip-hop culture is the new pop culture, and our tempo ranges aren't too fast," says Sevn Thomas, who helped produce Rihanna's Number One smash "Work." "Rappers can really swag out on slower beats."

But maybe there are other reasons as well: Pop culture's insatiable appetite for the new demands a backlash against fast-moving singles, or a gloomy national moment encourages a different sort of listening. ...

[Radio business veteran Sean] Ross worries about the dearth of uptempo singles – if there's nothing modern to balance out playlists, in his view, programmers turn to older tracks for a jolt of speed, further reducing the already limited variety on the airwaves. "Top 40 has become tighter than any time in the last 35 years in terms of the actual number of titles," he notes. "If you combine that with the time records spend on the charts now, there aren't a lot of chances for songs to come along and break the logjam. ... I've had conversations with programmers in every format, and usually the solution is to play even less new music, which ends up reducing the chance the next uptempo record is going to get through."
--Elias Leight, Rolling Stone, on an era that is hard to dance to. HT: Marginal Revolution

Friday, August 11, 2017

Why does new money like bling and old money like discreetness?

[A] puzzling aspect of conspicuous consumption [is that] it is often subtle, in the sense that it is difficult for others to observe and recognize. Handwrought silverware only signals wealth to dinner guests. Someone who wishes to signal his wealth as clearly as possible can do better: acknowledging this puzzle, Bagwell and Bernheim (1996) suggest publishing “tax returns or audited asset statements”.

We argue that people engage in subtly conspicuous consumption to simultaneously signal wealth and social capital. Here, social capital is about connectedness—a measure of the relationships that enable access to potentially valuable resources through social interaction...

Consider the following example. Adam is wealthy and socially well-connected. He can distinguish himself from less wealthy individuals by consuming costly status goods; for example, he might purchase an expensive car to drive around town. However, if Adam seeks to demonstrate that he is well-connected as well as wealthy, his consumption choice also has to distinguish him from wealthy, poorly-connected individuals. Thus, a better option might be buying an expensive painting to display in his living room. His guests, observing the painting, and noting that only Adam’s guests ever observe it, infer that he is well-connected because using this painting as a signal of his type is cost-effective only if Adam’s parties are attended by people who Adam seeks to impress. ...

Conventional wisdom often associates loud consumption with the nouveau riche: those who have recently become wealthy. On the other hand, subtle consumption is associated with old money: those whose families have been wealthy for generations. Our interpretation is that old-money types possess large amounts of social capital, as they have been able to develop social connections over time, whereas the nouveau riche, who acquired wealth only recently, have accumulated little social capital. ...

Many forms of cultural knowledge, such as appreciation of music, art or wine, qualify as subtle status goods in our theory: they (i) are costly to acquire, and (ii) being tacit in nature, can only be recognized through extensive social interaction. ... Taking the perspective that cultural capital serves as a subtle good relative to material status goods, our model predicts that individuals with high social capital prefer cultural consumption, whereas people with low social capital favour material status goods.
--Juan Carlos Carbajal, Jonathan Hall, and Hongyi Li, "Inconspicuous Conspicuous Consumption," on subtle status symbols versus bling

Sunday, August 6, 2017

What happens when churches take government money?

Governments have used vouchers to spend billions of dollars on private education; much of this spending has gone to religiously-affiliated schools. ... We use a dataset of Catholic-parish finances from Milwaukee... We show that vouchers are now a dominant source of funding for many churches; parishes in our sample running voucher-accepting schools get more revenue from vouchers than from worshipers. We also find that voucher expansion prevents church closures and mergers. Despite these results, we fail to find evidence that vouchers promote religious behavior: voucher expansion causes significant declines in church donations and church spending on non-educational religious purposes. The meteoric growth of vouchers appears to offer financial stability for congregations while at the same time diminishing their religious activities.
--Daniel Hungerman, Kevin Rinz, and Jay Frymark, "Beyond the Classroom: The Implications of School Vouchers for Church Finances," on where your treasure is, there will your heart be also