Sunday, September 28, 2025

Was 1800 (approximately) A Pivotal Year In Human History? Robert Fogel, Francis Fukuyama, And Deirdre McCloskey All Seem To Think So

Robert Fogel is a Nobel Prize Winning Economist. Here is something he said recently:

"Technology rescued humankind from centuries of physical maladies and malnutrition, Mr. Fogel argues. Before the 19th century (1800), most people were caught in an endless cycle of subsistence farming."
See Technology Advances; Humans Supersize.

Francis Fukuyama, author of the famous book The End of History and the Last Man, has a new book out. Here is an excerpt from a review of that book:
"But it is true that Mr. Fukuyama tracks a quest for "order" that often falls short of its goal until a decisive threshold is reached around 1800.

By then the Industrial Revolution—even at its earliest stages—had unleashed the forces of production in ways hitherto unimaginable, allowing for abundance rather than scarcity, not least in the production of food. But the threshold proved to be more than a matter of escaping "the Malthusian trap" of hunger and overpopulation. In the years surrounding the French Revolution, Mr. Fukuyama believes, politics began to shape itself—at last—into an orderly and sustainable form.

Obviously, political order had been achieved before then, but in a fitful and incomplete way. In Mr. Fukuyama's view, a durable political order can arise, and societies can fully thrive, only when a state is formed, when the state itself operates according to a rule of law, and when the state becomes accountable—that is, when it must answer to its citizens. Until the threshold point around 1800, he says, all three properties rarely existed together."
See From Dynasty to Democracy: Nations did not find stability, or sustained prosperity, until they became accountable to their citizens.

Deirdre McCloskey is a highly respected economic historian whose latest book is Bourgeois Dignity: Why Economics Can't Explain the Modern World. Here are some quotes from her:
"Modern economic growth—that stunning increase from $3 a day in 1800 worldwide to now upwards of $130 a day in the richest countries, and anyway $30 as a worldwide average—can’t be accounted for in the usual and materialist ways. It wasn’t trade, investment, exploitation, imperialism, education, legal changes, genes, science. It was innovation, such as cheap steel and the modern university, supported by an entirely new attitude towards the middle class, emerging from Holland around 1600. (It has parallels in classical music and mathematics and politics, in all of which the Europeans burst out, 1600-1800.)

Economics of the usual sort, whether Samuelsonian or Marxist, can’t get at why Europeans and then the rest of us started around 1800 to become insanely innovative. A new dignity for innovation and its market applications can: that’s a sociological change, supporting sensible economic policies.

What you can learn from the history is that stasis reigned until we discovered dignity and liberty for ordinary people, and in particular for the disturbing, irritating class of entrepreneurs."
See Don’t be snobbish towards merchants & entrepreneurs, and you’ll develop

Saturday, September 27, 2025

Great advice from Adam Smith

From Goodreads. It is from his book The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

“The prudent man always studies seriously and earnestly to understand whatever he professes to understand, and not merely to persuade other people that he understands it; and though his talents may not always be very brilliant, they are always perfectly genuine. He neither endeavours to impose upon you by the cunning devices of an artful impostor, nor by the arrogant airs of an assuming pedant, nor by the confident assertions of a superficial and imprudent pretender. He is not ostentatious even of the abilities which he really possesses. His conversation is simple and modest, and he is averse to all the quackish arts by which other people so frequently thrust themselves into public notice and reputation.”

Related posts:

Science Proves That Adam Smith Was Right Over 200 Years Ago (sort of) (2009) 

Adam Smith Meets Joseph Campbell (2017) 

Adam Smith And Joseph Campbell On The Dangers Of "The Man Of System" (2017) 

Adam Smith Meets Jonathan Haidt (on political polarization and the animosity of hostile factions) (2021)

Friday, September 26, 2025

Fraud in immigration applications and Type I & II Errors

See Agency That Issues Visas and Green Cards Is Hiring Armed Agents: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agents will now be allowed to arrest people for immigration violations by Michelle Hackman of The WSJ. Excerpts:

I used the book The Economics of Public Issues in my micro classes. Chapter 1 is called "Death by Bureaucrat." It discusses how the Food and Drug Administration can make either a Type I error or a Type II error.

Type I error: The FDA approves a drug before enough testing is done and when people take it, there are harmful side effects.

Type II error: The FDA tests a drug longer than necessary to stay on the safe side. But people might suffer because the drug is not yet available. 80,000 people died waiting for Septra to be approved.

The FDA would usually rather make a Type II error because the public can blame the FDA if a Type I error occurs. 

Something similar is happening with immigration applications. USCIS wants to block fraudulent immigration applications. But how will they know which are fraudulent and which are valid? They might designate too few as fraudulent (Type I error) and let in some applicants that don't deserve it or might even be criminals. They might designate too many as fraudulent (Type II error) and keep out some applicants that are legitimate, law abiding candidates.

How will they block only the bad applicants? The article is vague on that. The only thing it says is they will look for "patterns of fraud, like groups of immigrants from the same country who submit nearly identical immigration applications or citizenship applicants who fake disabilities." But how do they know who is faking it? How will they know how "nearly identical" something has to be? What if it is just similar? No line is explained.

Excerpts from the article: 

"U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said it plans to train several hundred federal law-enforcement agents to look for fraud in immigration applications" 

"Joe Edlow, the agency’s newly installed director, said in an interview that he envisions the new law-enforcement body investigating patterns of fraud, like groups of immigrants from the same country who submit nearly identical immigration applications or citizenship applicants who fake disabilities to avoid taking the English proficiency exam. They will also make denaturalization of new citizens who lied on their applications a priority, he said.

The changes, he argued, shouldn’t affect most immigrants who make bona fide requests of the government.

I’m not expecting this to have a chilling effect on applications,” Edlow said. “I’m expecting this to have a chilling effect on fraudulent applications, and that’s what I want.”

USCIS already has officers charged with tracking fraud or national security threats"

Related posts:
 
 
 

Accommodations for disabled people and Type I & II Errors (2023)

Thursday, September 25, 2025

Why Lawmakers Don’t Want to Ban Their Own Stock Trading

GOP Rep. Rob Bresnahan campaigned on ending the practice, but has become a top trader after entering office

By Katy Stech Ferek of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Many lawmakers decry stock trading on principle, only to back off later when faced with the practical impacts—ranging from transaction costs and taxes to annoyance over being told how to conduct their finances. While some are plowing ahead on ideas for new bans, passage remains uncertain after a history of failed efforts.

Proponents of a crackdown see trading as an obvious opportunity for corruption. Opponents note that insider trading is already illegal and say that new rules would discourage successful business people from running for Congress.

Sen. Rick Scott (R., Fla.), one of Congress’s wealthiest members, with investments in private equity and hedge funds, in a recent hearing raised questions about how lawmakers would sell illiquid assets under a stock-trading ban. Scott, who hasn’t reported any stock trading this year, said supporters of a ban were insinuating that a lawmaker’s wealth is bad."

"Only a third of House lawmakers and slightly less than half of senators traded individual stocks or held them as assets while in office last year"

"It is more common for lawmakers to hold investments in mutual funds, which wouldn’t be affected by most of the current trading-ban proposals."

"New bipartisan legislation . . . was rolled out Wednesday. The proposal would give lawmakers 180 days to sell off stocks or face fines." 

"Lawmakers passed the Stock Act in 2012, mandating more disclosures and explicitly outlawing trading on nonpublic information, but further efforts sputtered. In 2021, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.)—whose husband’s trades have become a target of conservative critics and good-government groups—defended lawmakers’ ability to trade. “We are a free-market economy,” she said. “They should be able to participate in that.”"

Related posts:

Lawmakers Traded Stocks Heavily as Trump Rolled Out ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs: Buying and selling of stocks spur new push to further restrict lawmakers’ market activities (2025) 

Looks Like Some Pretty Good Capitalists Run The Congress (2024)

Did U.S. government officials make money buying and selling stocks based on their inside information about Covid policy? (2022) 

60 Minutes: Insider trading is legal for members of Congress-but it is nothing new, it started in 1790  (2011) 

Tuesday, September 23, 2025

Is it bad if new entertainment technology allows us to spend more time at home?

See ‘Listen In’ Review: Around the Family Wireless by Steven Poole. He reviewed the book Listen In: How Radio Changed the Home by Beaty Rubens. Excerpt:  

"We learn that radio grew in popularity especially during hard economic times—when “the appeal of not having to wash or get dressed to listen in became stronger”—which may remind us of the surge in online pastimes during the Covid-19 pandemic."

We often say in economics that people want to maximize utility. And wanting to go out and socialize at live music venues might just be one item or argument in a person's utility function. How does a person maximize utility (if they spend all of their income)? They buy a quantity of good A and a quantity of good B to make this equation true:

MUA/PA = MUB/PB

MU is marginal utility or how much satisfaction you got from the last unit consumed of a good.

Suppose a person wants to go out (good A) and listen to music (good B). If the price of B falls (with radio the price of listening to music has fallen), and nothing else changes, then  

MUA/PA < MUB/PB

which means that the person is getting more satisfaction (or utils, a unit of satisfaction) from the last dollar spent on good B than good A. So they will want to consume more of B. But then they have to spend less on good A (maybe it terms of time or resources devoted to it). And you get a person who goes out less than they used to.

This could also be a case of listening to music at home being a substitute for going out to hear music. If the price of listening at home falls then the demand for going out also falls. 

I first thought of this when reading about how alot of young men are staying at home playing video games instead of going to school, getting a job, getting married, etc. Some are saying that this is a social problem. But if it is a case of one item falling in price (entertainment through video games) then it just like the price of B falling in the above example. So they do more of it (it might have been pretty expensive once to play high quality video games-you probably had to go out to an arcade and pay for each play). Now with very high quality video games at home, the price (not just the monetary price but the time cost) is lower, so you do more of it. This seems similar to what happened with radio in the 1930s.

Related post:

Adam Smith said that people want not only to be loved, but to be lovely (but how much does it cost to achieve that?) (2025)

Monday, September 22, 2025

San Antonio ranks third in U.S. for poverty rate among metro areas

By Ethan Trejo of News 4 San Antonio.

A few days ago I posted about the recent U. S. Census Bureau report on poverty and incomes in 2024 for the whole country. See The official poverty rate fell 0.4 percentage points to 10.6% in 2024

Now an excerpt from the article about San Antonio:

"San Antonio has the third-highest poverty rate among metropolitan areas in the United States, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau for 2023 and 2024.

The city's current poverty rate stands at approximately 13%, ranking only below Houston and Detroit, and surpassing both the state and national averages.

David Vequis, a professor of management at Incarnate Word's business school, said, "Well, there's, there's several reasons for it." 

He attributed the high poverty rate to factors such as average age and wages, but emphasized a lack of skilled workers as a primary reason."  

Saturday, September 20, 2025

There Is A Black Market On Capitol Hill

Yes, a black market in snacks. Pretty shocking. See Inside Capitol Hill's black market: Snacks by HELENA BOTTEMILLER EVICH of POLITICO. You can also check out POLITICO's guide for finding popular congressional office snacks. Excerpts: 

"Big deals over immigration reform or government spending may not be getting made on Capitol Hill, but political maneuvering can yield a free pack of Skittles for a staffer with a sugar craving.

It just might cost a bag of Fritos.

Home-state snacks are a mainstay in congressional office lobbies, alongside district maps, hometown magazines and displays of local tchotchkes. Walk into Sen. Rand Paul’s office and you’ll find Kellogg’s Pop-Tarts and Nutri-Grain bars in a basket next to the Kentucky almanac. Down the hall, Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson serves peanuts and Coca-Cola. Head upstairs to New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s office for Chobani yogurt.

But the treats not only give visiting constituents a taste of home, they also fuel black-market snack trading among House and Senate staffers.

Beyond the official displays of food politicking — like when John Boehner sent Nancy Pelosi Cincinnati’s famous Graeter’s Gelato for her birthday — the little-known snack trade cuts across state, district and party lines.

Dozens of junior staff who spoke with POLITICO described an elaborate barter system based on local products. Pepsi is swapped for M&M’s, and Coca-Cola for Craisins. Unpaid interns are rewarded with treats for fetching lawmaker signatures. Sharing a cellphone charger with another office might net a bag of chips or candy. The most dedicated snackers have compiled comprehensive lists of who has what — a Capitol Hill snack bible of sorts.

Food and beverage companies, or farm cooperatives, donate most of the snacks on the Hill, but some offices do purchase their own reserves. The donations are kosher under ethics rules as long as the products are from the lawmaker’s state and are primarily for “promotional purposes,” as well as available to office visitors and of minimal value to the recipient. Staffers aren’t supposed to directly ask suppliers for their snacks to be replenished, but they tend to not run out for long.

The covert snack economy is not just a way for hungry staffers to seek out chocolate-covered macadamia nuts from Hawaii or Lay’s chips from Texas. It’s a system for aides, especially low on the totem pole, to make friends, forge informal alliances and, ultimately, help keep Capitol Hill functioning.

Between arranging constituent tours and taking calls, staff assistants use a massive email Listserv to arrange snack swaps.

“They’re the ones that work the trades,” explained Adam Russell, a spokesman for Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.). Constituents visiting his office are offered walnuts, prunes and pistachios.

Dozens of offices serve treats from large conglomerates like PepsiCo, which has factories or distribution facilities in various lawmakers’ districts. Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.) serves PepsiCo products because there’s a bottling plant in Wichita, Kan. He’s personally a big fan of Snickers and Diet Pepsi, according to his staff.

Frito-Lay chips and Mars candy are the most common — and perhaps the most commonly traded — snacks on the Hill. Both manufacturers have operations in several states.

Home-state snacks transcend party affiliation. Republican Sen. Marco Rubio and Democrat Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz may not find much common ground, but they agree Tropicana orange juice is a delicious treat for guests.

And orange juice, it turns out, is a hot commodity on the Hill, trading at times for as many as five bags of Lay’s chips.

In an Arkansas-shaped basket, Republican Sen. John Boozman’s office serves a variety of Frito-Lay snacks, Little Debbie snack cakes and crisp rice treats made by Riceland, a farmers co-op. In Arkansas Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor’s office, you’ll find the same snacks, plus some Mountain Valley Water from Hot Springs, Ark.

Pop-Tarts may be “very popular” with Paul’s Kentucky visitors and staff popping by for a treat, but the Republican senator, known for being a bit of a health nut, does not eat them, according to his staff.

Not all products on the political circuit are well-known brands. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) has Ola! all natural granola, Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) has Cherry Mash, a chocolate cherry treat, and Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.) has Aplets & Cotlets, a square fruit puree and nut snack that isn’t all that tradable, according to multiple sources familiar with the delegation.

Some offices on Capitol Hill are not looped in on the snack trade and don’t have their own currency, and there are few staffers in either chamber who don’t know where the goods are and how to get them.

Those in the know target New York Sens. Chuck Schumer’s and Gillibrand’s offices, which actually have Greek yogurt-filled fridges. So do Idaho Sens. Mike Crapo and Jim Risch.

Ask around about who has the best snacks, and you’ll run into some local food folklore. Someone on the Hill has San Pellegrino, aides say, but they’re not sure who, or they won’t divulge their source. POLITICO couldn’t find the sparkling beverage. Another office had heard Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) serves Kombucha, a fermented “foodie” drink, on tap. He doesn’t, according to his office. At least two staffers had heard tales of free Shiner Bock flowing from the Texas delegation, but the search for the beer from the Lone Star State came up dry."

Related posts: 

A High School Banned Students From Selling Snacks. Predictably, a Black Market for Snacks Emerged. (2022)

Cartels: They're not just for drug dealers and oil producers anymore-maple syrup producers have one, too (2016-There was a black market for syrup) 

There Is A Black Market On Capitol Hill (2014-Another black market for snacks)

Should People Be Allowed To Sell Their Kidneys And Other Organs? (2010)

Friday, September 19, 2025

Does automation reduce stigma?

From Tyler Cowen

"By removing human cashiers, self-checkout registers may alter feelings of embarrassment experienced by customers. Using high-frequency scanner data from supermarkets in the Washington, D.C. area with staggered adoption of self-checkout, we conduct event study analyses on consumer purchasing behavior. On the extensive margin, we find positive but noisy effects of self-checkout adoption on sales of some stigmatized items. On the intensive margin, we show that stigmatized items are much more likely to be purchased at self-checkout than at cashier registers, especially condoms and pregnancy tests. We estimate that customers are willing to pay 8.5 cents in additional time cost for the privacy of purchasing stigmatized items at self-checkout.

Here is the full paper by Rebecca Cardinali., et.al.  Via the excellent Kevin Lewis.

I even draw distinctions across automated models.  For instance, if I have “a stupid question,” I am more likely to ask Grok, since I would rather GPT maintain a higher opinion of what I do and do not know."

Thursday, September 18, 2025

The official poverty rate fell 0.4 percentage points to 10.6% in 2024

See Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2024 from the U.S. Census Bureau. This was a press release from 9-9-25. Excerpts:

"The U.S. Census Bureau today announced that real median household income was $83,730 in 2024, not statistically different from the 2023 estimate of $82,690. The official poverty rate fell 0.4 percentage points to 10.6% in 2024."

  • Median household income was $83,730 in 2024, not statistically different from the 2023 estimate of $82,690.
  • Between 2023 and 2024, median income increased by 5.1% for Asian households and 5.5% for Hispanic households, while it declined by 3.3% for Black households. Median income did not change significantly for White or White non-Hispanic households. (The difference between the 2023-2024 percentage change in median household income for Asian householders and Hispanic householders was not statistically significant.)
  • Income inequality as measured by the Gini index was not significantly different between 2023 and 2024.
  • Household income at the 90th percentile increased 4.2%, but did not significantly change at the 10th and 50th percentiles between 2023 and 2024. 
  • In 2024, the official poverty rate fell 0.4 percentage points to 10.6%. There were 35.9 million people in poverty in 2024.
  • Between 2023 and 2024, the official poverty rate decreased for White, Asian and Hispanic individuals, but did not change significantly for other race groups discussed in the report. 

The 10.6% poverty rate is the 2nd lowest official poverty rate since 1959 when the Census Bureau first started reporting it. The lowest ever was the  10.5% in 2019. See Historical Poverty Tables: People and Families - 1959 to 2024. Then click on Table 2. Poverty Status of People by Family Relationship, Race, and Hispanic Origin. It is an Excel file.

See Historical Income Tables: Families from the Census Bureau. They also have a link for Gini coefficients for family income going back to 1947. See also Historical Income Tables: Households. See also Historical Poverty Tables: People and Families - 1959 to 2024. These Census Bureau links will take you to tables on poverty, incomes and inequality (the Gini coefficient measures inequality). Also see  Income & Poverty Data Tables.

Below are two timeline charts from the Census Bureau. One has income and the other has the poverty rate 

 

 

Related posts:

U.S. Incomes Climbed Last Year, Census Bureau Says (poverty fell and inequality was little changed): Household incomes rose 4% from 2022 to 2023, the first rise since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic (2024) 

Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2022 (2023)

U.S. Incomes Fail to Grow for Second Year in a Row, Census Figures Show (2022)

The Level and Trend of Poverty in the United States, 1939-1979 (2018)

More On Poverty (2012)

What has happened to the distribution of wealth in recent years? (2011)

Some Possibly Surprising Facts About Poverty (2012)

The U. S. Poverty Rate Was 10.5% in 2019, An All-Time Low (2020)

Mean Family Income By Quintiles (2017) 

Tuesday, September 16, 2025

Is it dangerous to say that entrepreneurs are heroes? (Part 2)

This is an addition to yesterday's post Is it dangerous to say that entrepreneurs are heroes?

See Does Congruence with an Entrepreneur Social Identity Encourage Positive Emotion Under Environmental Dynamism? by Charles Murnieks, Jeffery S. McMullen & Melissa S. Cardon. From 2017.

Here are excerpts. The part where they mention heroes is mentioned it is in bold red. Where they mention my name is in bold blue within the red.

"Introduction 

Comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell (1949) suggests that most cultures have some version of a “mono-myth,” which describes a journey that heroic individuals undertake in pursuit of a valuable goal amidst highly uncertain or perilous conditions. At the beginning of this journey, the protagonist rarely perceives himself as heroic, and is reluctant to depart on his quest because the dangers involved seem overwhelming. However, as the journey unfolds, the protagonist undergoes a transformation. By experiencing trials and tribulation, and successfully overcoming challenges, the protagonist becomes a hero. He experiences elation at achieving his goal despite tremendous adversity, and begins to view himself differently in the process. The mono-myth narrative is informative because it highlights the tension between the hero and a hostile environment. Even though the hero is afraid and reluctant to embark on the journey, the environment is fundamental in helping him to develop. By achieving his goal despite adversity, he feels heroic. Ironically, the intense hostility of the environment is actually what makes the story compelling, because it creates a background against which the protagonist’s actions are viewed as difficult and ultimately valiant, instead of mundane and ordinary.

Entrepreneurship scholars highlight similarities between Campbell’s mythological hero and the entrepreneur of entrepreneurship theory (Catford and Ray 1991; McMullen and Dimov 2013; Morong 1994). Morong (1994), in particular, illustrates how Schumpeter’s existentialistic portrayal of the entrepreneur offers an economic equivalent of Campbell’s archetype. Schumpeter’s (1934) entrepreneur undertakes a journey into an environment filled with uncertainty and peril where others fear to tread. Theoretical portrayals of the entrepreneur, such as Schumpeter’s (1934) or Knight’s (1921), are not isolated musings; they are part of the progressive revelation of the entrepreneur’s economic role in a market-based society. 

Although we employ the mono-myth narrative to emphasize the importance of the environment in the self-construal of the entrepreneur, we are mindful of scholars who caution against taking this metaphor too far and characterizing entrepreneurs as iconic superheroes imbued with extraordinary qualities (Ogbor 2000; Williams and Nadin 2013). They warn that entrepreneurs are not atomistic agents of change isolated from social influence (Dodd and Anderson 2007). They also remind us of the body of trait research that has failed to define the psychological profile of the fabled entrepreneurial “hero” (Gartner 1989). Perhaps most relevant to our investigation, these scholars caution against undersocialized methodologies that favor mythical depictions while ignoring consideration of the surrounding environment and how it impacts the entrepreneur’s journey. We wholly concur that entrepreneurship is more than an individualistic act and entrepreneurs themselves must be studied as social animals connected to context (Bruyat and Julien 2001; Dodd and Anderson 2007). Our reference to the mono-myth is meant to reinforce the idea that entrepreneurs do not develop their self-portrayals absent external input. Rather, the opposite is true; their selfperception is tied to their surroundings. Despite the emergence of studies that are beginning to explore how socio-environmental factors influence entrepreneurs (e.g., Fauchart and Gruber 2011; Powell and Baker 2014), significant gaps still exist concerning the black box of different facets that are influenced and the manner in which these interactions occur. An empirical void still surrounds the specific constructs involved and the nature of their relationships. We address these gaps, by focusing explicitly on entrepreneur social identities and the positive emotions they generate. This approach is valuable because it integrates social influences (in the form of social identities) and environmental factors to determine how they impact one very specific, and important, aspect of the entrepreneurial journey: the feelings the individual experiences as s/ he works to found a new enterprise. 

Social identities are cognitive schemas that incorporate meaning and expectations into social structure, thus translating general prescriptions for perception and feeling into specific imperatives at the individual level (Mead 1934; Stryker and Burke 2000). The entrepreneur social identity encompasses a host of characteristics that demarcate it from others in society. For this study, we concentrate on entrepreneur social identities defined by a connection to creating and founding1 new organizations (Bruyat and Julien 2001; Gartner 1989, 1990). We contend that as individuals grow closer to the prototype of the entrepreneur social identity, positive emotion (PE) is generated. Moreover, we posit that the environment plays a key role in how the individual interprets the journey toward achieving congruence with the entrepreneur social identity. Thus, this paper addresses two primary research questions: (1) what is the effect of social identity congruence on entrepreneurs’ positive emotions, and (2) how does environmental dynamism moderate this relationship? 

In a manner analogous to the mono-myth narrative, we argue that dynamic environments which appear turbulent may facilitate an individual’s entrepreneurial journey. Whereas environmental dynamism is a deterrent to the average everyman, it may increase the PE generated among entrepreneurs. Our logic draws from other social identities that call on actors to exhibit prototypical characteristics within perilous environments. For example, soldiers and firemen both seek to conform to their social identities despite threats to their own lives inherent in doing so. Their assumption of the characteristics prototypical of these identities is made heroic to some extent by the environment in which they operate. Typically, carrying a child out of a house on a normal day may not be viewed as valiant or result in high levels of PE. However, undertaking this action in a war zone, or when a house is burning and engulfed in flames, changes the meaning of the action as well as the generation of emotion. In this sense, achieving congruence with the social identity of a soldier or a fireman, amidst a challenging environment, yields higher positive emotion. In fact, it is possible that this PE satisfies “the need to feel alive” which Campbell claims underlies life’s vicissitudes and results from overcoming one’s fears to act courageously in the face of daunting surroundings." 

"Conclusion 

Our purpose in this study was to undertake an empirical investigation of the interaction between how entrepreneurs view themselves and how the external environment acts to influence those perceptions. Our findings lend credence to the fact that positive emotion among individual entrepreneurs is influenced by the congruence an individual experiences between their self-concept and the social identity of entrepreneur, an effect that is heightened by environmental dynamism. We take up the line of research initiated by Farmer, Yao, and KungMcintyre (2011) into entrepreneur identities, and hope to open the door to further empirical investigations into the burgeoning theories and questions that are developing in this stream. Some scholars suggest that civilization is a story about our endless attempt to reduce uncertainty and control our environment (North 2005). This highlights the importance the environment plays in our own existential struggle to achieve effectance. Indeed, Campbell (1949) argues that our primal drive is not the will to pleasure or power, but rather the simple desire to feel alive and that this comes from overcoming uncertainty."

Monday, September 15, 2025

Is it dangerous to say that entrepreneurs are heroes?

Back in the early 1990s, I wrote a paper called "The Creative-Destroyers: Are Entrepreneurs Mythological Heroes?"  

A reviewer at a journal said "The conclusion that entrepreneurs are heroes seems to be very dangerous!" That was in 1993.

There is a picture of this review below. After that is a link to where I posted this paper here on my blog. Then there are also links to the many people have said that entrepreneurs are heroes.

 

"The Creative-Destroyers: Are Entrepreneurs Mythological Heroes?" (Part 1). I posted it in several parts and all of the parts are linked at Part 1. For a short, one page version see An Essay In Honor Of "Small Business Saturday" And Entrepreneurs Everywhere.

Many people over the years have said that entrepreneurs are heroes.

Are we confounding heroism and individualism? Entrepreneurs may not be lone rangers, but they are heroic nonetheless by Jeffery S. McMullen in 2017.

See The Entrepreneur on the Heroic Journey by Dwight R. Lee & Candace Allen in 1997.

See Kirzner’s Entrepreneur and the Hero’s Journey by Amir Iraji in 2025.

See Towards a mythic process philosophy of entrepreneurship by Lauri J. Laine & Ewald Kibler. 

See  Who Says Entrepreneurs Are Heroes? (Remarks prepared for the first HERO'S JOURNEY ENTREPRENEURSHIP FESTIVAL, March 31st, 2007 at Pepperdine University). You can also read it here. This has even more people who have said it.

See Does It Matter If We Call Entrepreneurs Heroes? This also has more people who have said it.

Sunday, September 14, 2025

Health Insurance Costs for Businesses to Rise by Most in 15 Years

Insurers say that the rising premiums are driven by growing healthcare costs

By Anna Wilde Mathews of The WSJ

Any time the cost of producing a good or service rises the price consumers pay will rise.

Excerpts from the article:

"Costs for employer coverage are expected to surge about 9.5% in 2026, according to an estimate from Aon, while an employer survey by WTW suggested 9.2%."

"the recent average of roughly $25,500 for a family plan."

"Insurers say rising premiums for health coverage are driven by the growing cost of healthcare. The causes include higher prices for hospital care, expanding use of services—due in part to higher prevalence of conditions such as cancer in the working-age population—and pricey drugs, including the popular weight-loss and diabetes treatments known as GLP-1s.

Employers are moving to blunt the spike, and tactics such as changing plan designs are likely to shave a percentage point or two from the average increase, the benefits firms said. Some are pushing more costs to employees through larger payroll deductions for premiums or higher out-of-pocket charges such as deductibles."

"60% [of larger employers] were planning to look at replacing their health insurer or pharmacy-benefit manager in the next few years. It also found that nearly a third of employers surveyed are giving priority to new plan designs that could include changes such as limits on access to certain doctors or hospitals." 

"Rising employer healthcare costs are driven in part by the continuing impact of inflation, which has been playing out in higher prices negotiated by hospital systems. New, higher-cost drug therapies, including the GLP-1s, are also raising spending, insurers and benefits consultants say."

"Americans are using more healthcare services, partly due to rising care for serious health issues such as cancer, cardiovascular conditions such as atrial fibrillation, and musculo-skeletal problems that can lead to lower-back and joint procedures"

"Diseases that we usually thought of as for elderly, we’re seeing more and more in a younger, working-age population"

Related posts:
 
 
 
The EU forbids the use of gender to help calculate car insurance premiums, leading women to pay more and men to pay less (2021)
 
 

Some History of Insurance (2019

Technology Was Supposed to Transform Insurance Pricing. It Hasn’t (2023) 

Obscure Model Puts a Price on Good Health—and Drives Down Drug Costs (2020)

Pharmacy-benefit managers and drug prices (2023)

Patients Lose Access to Free Medicines Amid Spat Between Drugmakers, Health Plans  (2023)

Employers Cut Off Access to Weight-Loss Drugs for Workers  (2023)

Home Insurance Is So High in This Florida Town, Residents Are Leaving (2023) 

Nice EV You Got There—Can You Afford to Insure It? EVs are fast and full of technology. That makes them fun to drive but tougher to insure (2024)

New type of insurance protects against porch pirates (2024)

Social media, insurance and asymmetric information (2019)

California to Toughen Rules on Group Discounts for Car Insurance (2020)

Saturday, September 13, 2025

There Is Now Clearer Evidence AI Is Wrecking Young Americans’ Job Prospects (but the news is not all bad)

Young workers face rising AI competition in fields like software development, but some also benefit from AI as a helper, new research shows

By Justin Lahart of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Young workers are getting hit in fields where generative-AI tools such as ChatGPT can most easily automate tasks done by humans, such as software development"

[ther is] "evidence that in fields where AI can help people in their work, rather than replace them, employment among young people is improving."

"ChatGPT rolled out during a period when the Federal Reserve was curbing economic growth by sharply raising interest rates, and job growth was moderating from the pandemic-related hiring surge. The new research helps tease out the AI impact from those other factors." [a reminder about ceteris paribus, to hold all other factors constant]

"areas where AI can automate many of the tasks workers perform . . . such as software developers, receptionists, translators and customer service representatives . . . : Overall employment in those categories has softened since late 2022 relative to other occupations"

"Among software developers aged 22 to 25, for example, the head count was nearly 20% lower this July versus its late 2022 peak."

"Other factors could be hitting those computer-science jobs, including a general slump in employment at technology companies or pandemic-related education disruptions. But the data suggest such possibilities can’t explain away the AI effect on other types of jobs."

[the study was] "also able to rule out other factors that might skew the data, such as the interest-rate sensitivity of different businesses"

"AI might help medical professionals make accurate diagnoses more quickly"

"occupations where researchers have found AI could act as a helper, rather than a replacement, actually saw employment growth that exceeded overall employment"

Related posts:

AI Is Forcing the Return of the In-Person Job Interview: More companies are returning to face-to-face meetings to counter cheating by candidates—and more ominous digital threats (2025) 

AI’s Overlooked $97 Billion Contribution to the Economy: The AI ‘dividend’ may not be evident yet in estimates of gross domestic product but it’s making life better and more productive (2025) 

AI Is Wrecking an Already Fragile Job Market for College Graduates (is the problem structural Unemployment & the case of a skills mismatch?) Companies have long leaned on entry-level workers to do grunt work that doubles as on-the-job training. Now ChatGPT and other bots can do many of those chores (2025) 

No, AI Robots Won’t Take All Our Jobs: Instead, they will boost productivity, lower prices and spur the evolution of the labor market (2025) 

IBM CEO Says AI Has Replaced Hundreds of Workers but Created New Programming, Sales Jobs: The tech company promises higher total employment as it reinvests resources toward roles like software development (2025)

Technological Disruption in the Labor Market (2025)

Why AI Might Not Take All Our Jobs—if We Act Quickly (2025)

Some good news on productivity (2025) (AI is mentioned)

Some economics of A.I. (2025) 

The AI-Generated Population Is Here, and They’re Ready to Work (2024)

Robots writing science fiction (2024) 

Will technology cost artists their job? (2023)

“Why did the human stare at the glass of orange juice?” “They were trying to concentrate.” (2023) (Partly about AI being used to tell jokes)

The $900,000 AI Job Is Here (2023) 

Prompt engineers chat with generative-AI chatbots (creative destruction and how the economy just keeps creating new types of occupations & professions) (2023)

Are robots writing fake product reviews? (2022)

What if companies can't afford real models for their ads? Use AI generated fake pictures (2020) 

An AI Breaks the Writing Barrier (2020) 

What Econ 101 Can Teach Us About Artificial Intelligence: Here's why advancing technology often leads to more jobs for humans, not fewer (2017)