Quieter Streets Linked to Increase in Home Prices

Researchers find that when sound barriers are constructed along busy highways, the prices of homes nearest those barriers spike

By Lisa Ward of The WSJ. 

This reminds me of negative externalities which are costs imposed on third parties without compensation. Driving your car creates noise and that is a cost for people living near the highway. By creating quieter neighborhoods, the houses there become more valuable because the cost of noise is no longer being imposed on them.

Excerpts from the article:

"in the five years after noise barriers were built, the price of properties within 100 meters (about 109 yards) of a barrier saw a rise of almost 6.8% compared with homes in a control group."

"The barrier’s effect on property values declined with distance"

There were "price increases of about 3.9% for homes located 100 to 200 meters from a newly constructed sound barrier, 3.1% for homes located 200 to 300 meters from a barrier and 2.8% for homes 300 to 400 meters from a barrier."

"there is an almost 1% jump in property values for every decibel of traffic noise muffled by the average sound barrier"

"Five years before the construction of the sound barrier, home prices in both the treatment and control groups moved in tandem, influenced by similar variables"

"five years after noise barriers were built, properties closest to the busy highway saw an immediate and largely permanent increase in property values, above and beyond any normal price moves."

"traffic noise reduces property values by about $110 billion nationally"

I wonder about the last item. It implies that if we got rid of all the noise, it would raise property values by $110 billion. There is certainly value in reducing noise since people would pay for such reductions.

But if all traffic noise were gone, owning a house in a quiet neighborhood would not have any added value since they would all be in quiet neighborhoods. Now maybe houses in previously noisy areas would become more desirable, so their value would go up because their demand would increase. But then demand for other houses (ones that were already in quiet areas) would fall and their value would fall.

In that case, some houses go up in value and others go down. Would total property value rise, fall or stay the same?

Related posts:

New Noise Cameras Pit Drivers of Fast Cars Against Their Neighbors: Traffic police deploy new technology—and steep fines—to combat roaring mufflers, revving engines and blaring stereos (2025) 

Could a tax on vehicle miles traveled instead of a per-gallon gas tax raise money for the Highway Trust Fund and increase social welfare? (2017)

Vehicle Exhaust Linked To Brain-Cell Damage, Higher Rates of Autism (2011)

Could Those Hours Online Be Making Kids Nicer? Maybe Facebook and Twitter have positive externalities (2011)

Genetically Engineered Corn Has Positive Externalities (2010)

Smoking As A Negative Externality (2009) (But also see The Implicit Association Test, “fails the most basic reliability and validity criteria & second hand smoke is not dangerous from 2021)

Determining The Cost Of Pollution Is Hard (Which Makes Finding The Right Government Policy Hard, Too) (2009)

Should Movie Downloaders Who Clog The Internet Pay More? (2008) 

Do Tariffs Cause Inflation? New Studies Offer Surprising Answer

Trump’s tariffs haven’t caused the surge in prices that many economists predicted

By Konrad Putzier of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco combed through data from 1886 to 2017 and found that previous tariff increases usually didn’t lead to higher inflation. On the contrary: They slowed down price growth. A separate recent paper by economists at Northwestern University found that inflation picked up following tariff increases, but only a little."

"tariffs tend to hurt the economy and that a blow to consumer and business demand likely explains why the impact on inflation is so limited."

"Basic economic principles suggest that higher tariffs should push up the price of imported goods, typically leading to a one-time increase in inflation. But . . .  a 1-percentage-point increase in tariffs went along with a 0.6-percentage-point drop in inflation. "

"rising tariffs went hand in hand with rising unemployment, which may help explain the inflation riddle. Tariff shocks create economic uncertainty, weighing on businesses and consumers. As the economy slows, demand for goods and services falls, weighing on prices."

Other research shows "that tariff increases were usually followed by slightly higher inflation. But the impact was small because rising import costs were counterbalanced by falling demand as imports and exports dropped and manufacturing activity contracted."

"Hiring has slowed to a crawl since April"

"a key index tracking activity in the manufacturing sector fell to a 14-month low in December."

"Some economists argue that Trump’s tariffs will eventually have a bigger impact on inflation as companies gradually raise prices. Others point out that the real tariff rates companies actually pay are lower than the headline numbers, thanks in part to loopholes and exemptions". 

"the real average tariff rate was 14.1% as of late September, well below the headline number of 27.4%."

Related posts:

Americans Are the Ones Paying for Tariffs, Study Finds: Research contradicts President Trump’s claim that foreigners are footing the bill, and could weaken his hand in the dispute over Greenland (2025) 

Tracking the Short-Run Price Impact of U.S. Tariffs (2025) 

Why Haven’t Tariffs Boosted Inflation? This Theory Is Gaining Traction: New research suggests the actual tariff rates are well below what economists have suspected (2025) 

Trump’s Tariffs Are Being Picked Up by Corporate America: Neither consumers nor foreign countries are assuming much of the tariff burden. At least not yet. (2025) 

Are Businesses Absorbing the Tariffs or Passing Them On to Their Customers? (2025) (This one has supply and demand curves that show that businesses usually can't pass all of a tax like tariffs on to the buyers and that how much gets passed along depends on the price elasticity of demand for the different products) 

Trump’s Tariffs Are Unique in History: U.S. trade policy went through three eras, focused on ‘revenue, restriction and reciprocity,’ economist Douglas Irwin says. The 47th president likes all three Rs, and a fourth, ‘retribution.’ (2025) 

Can Trump’s Tariff Offensive Deliver New American Jobs? (2025)

Americans Are Stockpiling Ahead of Trump’s Tariffs (2025)

Powell Warns of ‘Challenging Scenario’ for Fed as Trade War Rages (2025) 

How Much Do Tariffs Raise Prices? (2025)

Politicians talk about creating manufacturing jobs but do people really want them? (2025)

How some of Trump's policies might affect the economy (2024)

Tariffs are regressive: they fall more heavily on lower-income families who tend to spend more of their income on cheap imported goods (2024)

Americans Are Stockpiling to Get Ahead of Tariffs: Some consumers are snapping up computer parts, vacuum cleaners, coffee and olive oil before levies take effect (2024)

Life is full of tradeoffs: If we support American workers with trade restrictions it might mean more inflation (2023)

Americans Are the Ones Paying for Tariffs, Study Finds

Research contradicts President Trump’s claim that foreigners are footing the bill, and could weaken his hand in the dispute over Greenland

By Tom Fairless of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Americans, not foreigners, are bearing almost the entire cost of U.S. tariffs, according to new research [published  by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy]"

"suggests that the impact of tariffs is likely to show up over time in the form of higher U.S. consumer prices."

[other research] "by the Budget Lab at Yale and economists at Harvard Business School, finding that only a small fraction of the tariff costs were being borne by foreign producers."

"foreign exporters absorbed only about 4% of the burden of last year’s U.S. tariff increases by lowering their prices, while American consumers and importers absorbed 96%."

"Indian exporters maintained their prices but reduced the volume of shipments to the U.S. by 18%-24% relative to the European Union, Canada and Australia"

"The $200 billion in additional U.S. tariff revenue last year “was paid almost exclusively by Americans”" 

"only around 20% of the tariffs had fed into higher consumer prices six months after their introduction, with the bulk eaten by U.S. importers and retailers."

A tariff is like an excise tax. Below is something that I did in class that explains why price does not rise as much as the tax (or rise as much as an increase in production or wholesale costs). So there is some sharing of the cost of the tariff among buyers and sellers.

Here we will look at an excise tax or a per unit tax. Every time a unit of a good is sold, the seller must give the government a flat amount, like $1 (not a percentage). If the government enacts an excise tax, the supply curve must shift up by the amount of the tax.

 

 

In the graph below, suppose that an excise tax of $1 is enacted. There is a new supply curve. Every point on the new supply line is exactly $1 above the old supply line.

Notice that every point on S₂ is exactly $1 above S₁. This because the firms in this market now need $1 more dollar for each quantity supplied. Before the tax was enacted, the market needed $1 to supply 1 unit. But now, because of the tax, they need an extra dollar or $2 to supply 1 unit.

The price has gone from $5.50 to $6.00. This means that buyers must pay 50 cents more (or $.50 more). So they are paying $.50 of the $1.00 excise tax. That means that the seller also pays $.50 of the $1.00 excise tax.

When you buy the product, you give the seller $6.00. But they must give $1.00 to the government. Before the tax, you gave the seller $5.50. So now they get $.50 less.

In this case, buyers and sellers evenly split the cost of the tax. But if the slopes of the supply and demand curves were different, the buyers or sellers could pay more than half the tax.

 

Related posts:

Tracking the Short-Run Price Impact of U.S. Tariffs (2025) 

Why Haven’t Tariffs Boosted Inflation? This Theory Is Gaining Traction: New research suggests the actual tariff rates are well below what economists have suspected (2025) 

Trump’s Tariffs Are Being Picked Up by Corporate America: Neither consumers nor foreign countries are assuming much of the tariff burden. At least not yet. (2025) 

Are Businesses Absorbing the Tariffs or Passing Them On to Their Customers? (2025) (This one has supply and demand curves that show that businesses usually can't pass all of a tax like tariffs on to the buyers and that how much gets passed along depends on the price elasticity of demand for the different products) 

Trump’s Tariffs Are Unique in History: U.S. trade policy went through three eras, focused on ‘revenue, restriction and reciprocity,’ economist Douglas Irwin says. The 47th president likes all three Rs, and a fourth, ‘retribution.’ (2025) 

Can Trump’s Tariff Offensive Deliver New American Jobs? (2025)

Americans Are Stockpiling Ahead of Trump’s Tariffs (2025)

Powell Warns of ‘Challenging Scenario’ for Fed as Trade War Rages (2025) 

How Much Do Tariffs Raise Prices? (2025)

Politicians talk about creating manufacturing jobs but do people really want them? (2025)

How some of Trump's policies might affect the economy (2024)

Tariffs are regressive: they fall more heavily on lower-income families who tend to spend more of their income on cheap imported goods (2024)

Americans Are Stockpiling to Get Ahead of Tariffs: Some consumers are snapping up computer parts, vacuum cleaners, coffee and olive oil before levies take effect (2024)

Life is full of tradeoffs: If we support American workers with trade restrictions it might mean more inflation (2023)

How This AI-Infused Warehouse Sorts Real Louis Vuitton Bags From Fakes

The RealReal’s Athena system helps validate goods submitted for resale, cutting down the timeline to list them for sale

By Jennifer Williams of The WSJ. 

I have done many posts on both AI and fakes over the years. So this article touches on two regular topics. After some excerpts from this article I have a links to two of those posts which then have links to all the posts I have done on both AI and fakes. Plus a comment from the famous psychiatrist Dr. Van Pelt.

The company has "an AI-infused program . . . Called Athena" [that] "helps discern authentic products from fakes."

"Athena’s focus so far is designers and brands such as Jimmy Choo and Alice + Olivia, ones that are less challenging to authenticate. But with a year’s worth of learning, Athena’s reach is expanding this year into midtier and high-end luxury items and with that, executives say it could save the company millions of dollars. For one, the AI assistance means the company doesn’t have to hire as many people as it grows, said Chief Financial Officer Ajay Gopal. It will also cut the timeline to list an item for sale by as much as 50%, which executives see as critical to keeping sellers happy and moving through inventory at a faster clip."

"One uses a bluetooth-connected measuring tape to automatically capture dimensions of Frame pants. Another wields a roughly 5-pound device that looks similar to a speed gun to determine whether the hardware on an Hermès Birkin handbag suggests it’s real. Elsewhere in the warehouse, an authenticator uses a device smaller than a stapler to scan a Louis Vuitton tote to help determine whether the leather, stitching and branding are authentic."

"When items such as a pair of Frame pants and a Birkin bag arrive at the warehouse, they are added to The RealReal’s inventory of millions of items. Clothing and accessories are measured and their condition assessed, meanwhile photos capture the garment’s tags to feed to Athena, which is working in the background to help automatically authenticate and populate listing details such as size and the fabric used. The tech also assigns a counterfeiting risk score based on the company’s years of collecting information on real and fake items."

One worker is "using The RealReal’s microimaging AI tool called Vision, which takes snaps of various parts of the bag and compares them with the millions of images in The RealReal’s repository, to make comparisons."

"Athena also tells [authenticator Tetiana] Byndiu that the bag meets expectations for the real thing, including the metal closure, the lack of card slots and the presence of coated canvas."

"Executives expect Athena to cut the time it takes for an item to go from a loading dock to posted for sale to seven days on average from 14 now, saving a couple of dollars on every sale."

Related posts:

Data Centers Are a ‘Gold Rush’ for Construction Workers Surging demand means six-figure pay and more perks (2025) (this link has links to all the posts I have done on AI and the economy)

Renters Are Conning Their Way Into Luxury Apartments: Atlanta, where up to half of rental applications contain fraudulent information, is epicenter of national surge in these scams (2025) (this link has links to all the posts that I have done on fakes)

 

Poor whites used to vote for Democratic presidential candidates while rich whites voted Repulican. This has now reversed

See Entertainment got too good by Eric Levitz of Vox. The article has some interesting ideas on why this happened along with some useful graphics. I have links to several related posts on the attitudes of Democrats & Repulicans, what shapes their views, how they differ, how they affect their daily lives and why they change over time.

Excerpts:

"In today’s America, the less money a white voter has, the more likely they are to support Donald Trump.

Whites in the bottom 10 percent of America’s income distribution broke for the GOP nominee in 2024 by landslide margins. Those in the top 5 percent largely backed Democrat Kamala Harris, according to American National Election Studies data.

For most of the past century, the opposite pattern prevailed: In every presidential election from 1948 to 2012, poor whites voted to the left of rich ones.

But that changed in 2016. Eight years later, the new, negative correlation between income and Republicanism among whites became unprecedentedly strong"

"In the mid-20th century, Americans without college degrees voted sharply to the left of university graduates. But beginning in the late 1960s, this gap started to narrow before finally flipping in 2004. The relationship between socioeconomic status and partisanship in the United States therefore changed gradually — and then, with Trump’s populist rebrand of the GOP, all at once."

"voters began sorting themselves less on the basis of their economic attitudes and more on that of their cultural ones. And since college-educated voters lean left on most social issues — while less educated voters lean right — this eroded the lower classes’ traditional attachment to the Democratic Party (and the upper classes’ historic ties to the GOP)."

"By embracing “neoliberal” stances on trade and regulation, Democrats narrowed the gap between the parties on economic issues, thereby making their divisions on social matters more conspicuous."

Related posts:

People gave up a chance to win money in order to avoid hearing from those with opposing political views (2017) 

People say the president can control gas prices if the president belongs to the other party (2017)

Are some blue jeans really Democratic and others Republican? (2019)

Why Are Americans So Distrustful of Each Other? (2021)

"In 2017, around 70% of Democrats said that Donald Trump voters couldn't be trusted, and around 70% of Republicans said the same of Hillary Clinton voters" 

More and more, executives at major corporations belong to the same politcal party and tend to leave their companies if they are in the minority party there (2022) 

Adam Smith Meets Jonathan Haidt (on political polarization and the animosity of hostile factions)  (2023)

Why Tribalism Took Over Our Politics: Social science gives an uncomfortable explanation: Our brains were made for conflict (2023) 

Democrats and Republicans say economy is improving, but mostly only when someone from their party is president (2024) 

Did Fracking in Pennsylvania Turn Democrats Into Republicans and Republicans Into Democrats? (2024)

Are fewer Democrats buying Teslas because of Elon Musk's political views? (2024)

Partisanship deeply colors how Americans think about trade policy, especially tariffs (2024) 

Would you give up some income in order to get a job at a firm whose workers share your political opinions? (2024)

Republicans Are Feeling Good Again, Driving Up Consumer Sentiment: Democrats’ sentiment slips, but overall index ticks higher (2024)

Causes and Extent of Increasing Partisan Segregation in the U.S. – Evidence from Migration Patterns of 212 Million Voters (2025)

Red vs. Blue Is Dividing Stock Portfolios Like Never Before: A political gap in optimism about markets is translating into trading decisions (2025)

Can testosterone shift political preferences? (2025)

What does conservatism mean? Fewer taxes & regulations or preserving traditional values and communities? A Republican county in Tennessee faces this question when farmers go against land developers (2025) 

See also Americans start caring more about deficits and the national debt when the party they oppose runs them up by John V. Kane of New York University and Ian G. Anson of The University of Maryland. Excerpt:

"In the past two decades, US budget deficits have skyrocketed, and the national debt is now over $22 trillion. But do Americans care about the size of deficits and the national debt? In new research, John V. Kane and Ian G. Anson find that people tend to care more about the deficits and debts when they are increased by presidents from the party that they oppose. Both Republicans and Democrats, they write, become less concerned about governments running deficits when their President is in charge."

Elite Colleges Are Back at the Top of the List for Company Recruiters

As white-collar hiring slows down and corporate DEI goals vanish, where you went to college matters again

By Lindsay Ellis of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"A 2025 survey of more than 150 companies found that 26% were exclusively recruiting from a shortlist of schools, up from 17% that were doing so in 2022, according to Veris Insights, which conducted the research."

"job applicants who attend prestigious universities or schools located close to company headquarters are given priority"

"Diversity was a priority for school recruiting selection for 31% of employers surveyed in 2025, down from nearly 60% of those polled in 2022."

"Most now recruit only at up to 30 American colleges out of about 4,000, starting with top-ranked schools and then looking at local universities"

"Companies are flooded with ChatGPT-generated résumés that look identical, so a job candidate’s college can be a distinguishing factor and focusing on key schools helps hiring managers cull thousands of applications for one position."

"Key assessments include gauging an applicant’s curiosity and ability to read a room, which are increasingly important skills as AI takes over other parts of consulting jobs, such as making slide decks."

One expert "advises students to start strategizing about their job search even before enrolling freshman year and to look for opportunities where others won’t, for instance by researching the top 100 companies in an industry, instead of just a few."

This reminds me of "signaling" in economics. Here is what Wikipedia says about it:

"In contract theory, signalling (or signaling; see spelling differences) is the idea that one party (termed the agent) credibly conveys some information about itself to another party (the principal). For example, in Michael Spence's job-market signalling model, (potential) employees send a signal about their ability level to the employer by acquiring education credentials. The informational value of the credential comes from the fact that the employer believes the credential is positively correlated with having greater ability and difficult for low ability employees to obtain. Thus the credential enables the employer to reliably distinguish low ability workers from high ability workers." 

Related posts:

Do employers still think that a college degree is a good signal of future productivity? (2025) 

Changing pathways to success for young people and how some high schoolers might be getting there (2025) 

Do Liberal Arts Colleges Pay Off? What the Data Say (2024) 

The Top U.S. Colleges That Make New Graduates Rich (2024) 

Is College Worth It? (2024) (Interesting tool created by FREOPP. It allows you to find out your return on investment (ROI) from going to college. You can choose a school and a major and it will tell you your ROI.)

When it comes to lifetime earnings, the most important decision appears to be the choice of college major (2024)

Studying Economics Increases Wages a Lot (2020)

What College Majors Pay The Highest? (2013)

50 College Majors With the Best Return on Investment (2015)

Will Studying Economics Make You Rich? A Regression Discontinuity Analysis of the Returns to College Major  (2023)

Why do employers pay extra money to people who study a bunch of subjects in college that they don’t actually need you to know? Signaling (2020)

Cognitive Endurance as Human Capital (2022) 

Yes, a College Degree Is Still Worth It (2023)

Does It Pay To Go To College? (2009)

Maybe That College Degree Is Not As Valuable As You Thought (2010)

Is College Still A Good Investment? (2012)

For Some Grads, College Isn't Worth Debt (2014)

The Diminishing Returns of a College Degree: In the mid-1970s, far less than 1% of taxi drivers were graduates. By 2010 more than 15% were (2017)

The Diminishing Returns of a College Degree (2017) 

Many college dropouts are worse off economically than if they hadn’t started college (2019)

College Still Pays Off, but Not for Everyone (2019)

Also see The Philadelphia Eagles' Personnel Strategy: Targeting College Grads: Six of the Seven Players the Team Drafted This Year Are on Track to Graduate by Kevin Clark of the WSJ. It seems like NFL teams see the college degree as a signal. Exceprt:

"Philadelphia's philosophy of pursuing graduates was born when Roseman, the Eagles' general manager since 2010, and Kelly, the team's second-year coach, each discovered that teams with the most college graduates are overwhelmingly successful. Kelly learned this late in his coaching tenure at Oregon, when former Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy, whose son played at Oregon, mentioned in a talk to Oregon players that in the 2000s, the two teams who happened to have loads of graduates were the Colts and New England Patriots. Those teams dominated the first decade of this century.

"I didn't know he'd take it this far," Dungy said, jokingly.

In a private conversation later, Dungy, now an analyst for NBC, told Kelly that his research showed players with degrees were more likely to earn a second NFL contract and make more money. He told Kelly "the guys with degrees have what you are looking for. They are driven. If it's between two players, a degree might tip the scale. But at the time, I don't think he was even thinking of the NFL."

But before Kelly even arrived in Philadelphia, Roseman was doing his own research. Each year, Roseman and his lieutenants take the last four teams left in the playoffs and do reports on them—studying their players' height, weight, background and virtually everything else. Through those reports came evidence that the most successful teams had many college graduates on them. When Roseman and Kelly joined forces, the plan was clear.

The trends over the last five drafts are startling. Studies show that teams who select players who spent five years in college—and thus almost always have a degree—win big. Of the three teams with the most fifth-year seniors drafted, two of them met in February's Super Bowl: the Seattle Seahawks and Denver Broncos. The Jacksonville Jaguars, who went 4-12, took the fewest.

The team that drafted the most players who stayed just three years on campus? The New York Giants, who have missed the playoffs the past two seasons. The Colts, Patriots and Washington Redskins, who have five total playoff appearances in the last two years, have taken the fewest three-year players, who rarely have college degrees.

Kelly said a degree is more than proof of intelligence. "It's also, what is their commitment?" he said. "They set goals out for themselves and can they follow through for it? A lot of people can tell you they want to do this, this and this. But look at their accomplishments."

The Eagles say they want players who are prepared, and a degree confirms that. Take wide receiver Jordan Matthews, a Vanderbilt economics major whose study habits translated perfectly to the NFL."

A Doonesbury comic strip from 1980 seemed to predict this. One of the college players in the huddle says he is taking a course in Bio-Physics during football season to impress the scouts. The printing might be hard to read, so I typed up all the dialogue and put it after the strip.

 

 Anyone see Willy?

He had to finish up a Bio-Physics report.

Where is he really?

I couldn't believe it either.

Okay Turner, what do you have to say for yourself?

Sorry, I'm late B.D. I had to finish up a Bio-Physics report.

Bio-Physics? What the hell are you doing taking a course that tough during football season?

To impress the scouts, man. I'm hoping to make the pros.

Impress the scouts?

You figure a good transcript will improve your chances, Willy?

Of course, man. You can't even think about joining the pros unless you've had four years of college.

No kidding?

Absolutely. Its virtually unheard of for a kid to get a job in the NFL with only a high school education.

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard! Nobody cares if football players are educated!

Sure they do. Why do you think there's such a thing as academic eligibility?

But that's a joke. For Gods's sake!

So what's your plan, Willy?

Well, I thought if I held off and got my masters, it might give me an edge

Does Neuroscience Prove That You Should Follow Your Bliss?

The Freakonomicis guys, STEPHEN J. DUBNER and STEVEN D. LEVITT, wrote an article in 2006 in the NY Times magazine called A Star Is Made. In it, they discussed the research of Anders Ericsson, a 58-year-old psychology professor at Florida State University. Here is a relevant passage:

"Ericsson's research suggests a third cliché as well: when it comes to choosing a life path, you should do what you love — because if you don't love it, you are unlikely to work hard enough to get very good. Most people naturally don't like to do things they aren't "good" at. So they often give up, telling themselves they simply don't possess the talent for math or skiing or the violin. But what they really lack is the desire to be good and to undertake the deliberate practice that would make them better."

See Never Too Late to Learn. It is a book review from Saturday's WSJ. The book reviewed was Guitar Zero by Gary Marcus. Here is the passage:

"Brain scans show that musicians' new neuronal connections vary according to the instrument they play. Violinists have their signature brain changes, brass players theirs. Loving what we do helps to form these new connections, because the same dopamine chemistry that gives us the pleasurable rush of reward consolidates new brain connections."

Of course, mythologist Joseph Campbell said "follow your bliss."

What does it mean to follow your bliss? In general, it means three things:

1. Money and material things are secondary (Campbell, 1988, pp. 148,229). The following is dialogue between Joseph Campbell and Bill Movers from The Power of Myth (1988,p. 148):

C: My general formula is "Follow your bliss." Find where it is, and don't be afraid to follow it.

M: Is it my work or my life?

C: If the work you're doing is the work that you choose to do because you are enjoying it, that's it. But if you think, "Oh, no! I couldn't do that!" that's the dragon locking you in. "No, no, I couldn't be a writer," or "No, no, I couldn't do what So-and-so is doing."

M: In this sense, unlike heroes such as Prometheus or Jesus, we're not going on our journey to save the world but to save ourselves.

C: But in doing that, you save the world (emphasis added).

Elsewhere, Campbell says that the savior is the one who can transcend the pairs of opposites (Briggs & Maher, 1989, p. 45). This means going beyond the duality of individual and group that is stressed in socio-economics (Campbell 1988, p. 229):

C: Each incarnation has a potentiality, and the mission of the life is to live that potentiality. How do you do it? My answer is, "Follow your bliss." There's something inside you that knows when you're in the center, that knows when you're on the beam or off the beam. And if you get off the beam to earn money, you've lost your life. And it you stay in the center and don't get any money, you still have your bliss.

Finally, Leeming sums up the Jungian importance of myths:

The person who lives without myths lives without roots, without links to the collective self which is finally what we are all about. He is literally isolated from reality. The person who lives with a myth gains 'a sense of wider meaning' to his existence and is raised 'beyond mere getting and spending" (Leeming, 1973, p. 321).

2. If you follow your bliss, doors (opportunities) will open up for you where they would not have opened up before. They will also open up for you where they would not have opened up for anyone else (Cousineau, 1990, p. 214). This echoes one of Campbell's favorite writers, Goethe:

Concerning all acts of initiative and creation, there is one elemental truth-the ignorance of which skills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, the Providence moves, too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred (Catford & Ray, 1991, p. 5).

3. Following your bliss has to be contrasted with following a system or a social system. A system creates roles for us that are not of our own choosing. This dehumanizes us (Campbell, 1988, p. 143-144). The following is also dialogue between Joseph Campbell and Bill Movers from The Power of Myth (pp. 143-144):

M: Do movies create hero myths? Do you think, for example that a movie like Star Wars fills some of that need for a model of the hero?

C: I've heard youngsters use some of George Lucas' terms-"the Force" and "the dark side.' So it must be hitting somewhere. It's a good sound teaching, I would say.

M: I think that explains in part the success of Star Wars. It wasn't just the production value that made that such an exciting film to watch, it was that it came along at a time when people needed to see in recognizable images the clash between good and evil. They needed to be reminded of idealism, to see a romance based upon selflessness rather than selfishness.

C: The fact that the evil power is not identified with any specific nation on this earth means you've got an abstract power, which represents a principle, not a specific historic situation. The story has to do with an operation of principles not of this nation against that. The monster masks that are put on people in Star Wars represent the real monster force in the modern world. When the mask of Darth Vader is removed, you see an unformed man, one who has not developed as a human individual. What you see is a strange and pitiful sort of undifferentiated face.

M: What is the significance of that?

C: Darth Vader has not developed his own humanity. He's a robot. He's a bureaucrat, living not in terms of himself but in terms of an imposed system. This is the threat to our lives that we all face today. Is the system gong to flatten you out and deny you your humanity, or are you going to be able to make use of the system to the attainment of human purposes? How do you relate to the system so that you am not compulsively serving it? It doesn't help to try to change it to accord with your system of thought. The momentum of history behind it is too great for anything really significant to evolve from that kind of action. The thing to do is to learn to live in your period of history as a human being. That's something else, and it can be done.

M: By doing what?

C: By holding to you own ideals for yourself and, like Luke Skywalker, rejecting the system's impersonal claims upon you.

M: When I took our two sons to see Star Wars, they did the same thing the audience did at that moment when the voice of Ben Kenobi says to Skywalker in the climactic moment of the last fight, "Turn off your computer, turn off your machine and do it yourself, follow your feelings, trust your feelings." And when he did, he achieved success, and the audience broke out into applause.

C: Well, you see, that movie communicates. It is a language that talks to young people, and that's what counts. It asks, Are you going to be a person of heart and humanity-because that's where the life is, from the heart-or are you going to do whatever seems to be required of you by what might be called "intentional power"? When Ben Kenobi says, "May the Force be with you," he's speaking of the power and energy of life, not of programmed political intentions.

In the movie Star Wars, Luke Skywalker turns off his computer (the impersonal system) and relies on the "Force" or his intuition to destroy the Death Star.

Generally speaking, following your bliss unlocks your creative potential because you separate from your community or system. "You can't have creativity unless you leave behind the bounded, the fixed, all the rules" (Campbell, 1988, p. 156). Attaining the joy of being a creative, spiritually fulfilled person is probably the best thing we can do for ourselves.

Sources:

Briggs, D., & Maher, J.M. (1989). An open life: Joseph Campbell in conversation with Michael Toms. New York: Harper and Row.

Campbell, J. (1988). The power of myth. New York: Doubleday.

Catford, L., & Ray, M. (1991). The path of the everyday hero. Los Angeles: Tarcher.

Cousineau, P. (1990). The hero's journey: Joseph Campbell on his life and work. San Francisco: Harper.

Leeming, D.A. (1973). Mythology: The voyage of the hero. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. 

Related posts:

Does Evolutionary Psychology Support Joseph Campbell's Belief In The Need For A World Mythology?

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

Joseph Campbell Meets Joseph Schumpeter (The Entrepreneur As Hero)

Adam Smith Meets Joseph Campbell

Is there a mechanic shortage?

See The $160,000 Mechanic Job That Ford Can’t Fill: Ford’s CEO says 5,000 jobs are open. Mechanics say there is little wonder why by Christopher Otts of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"39-year-old father of two, [Ted] Hummel is one of Ford Motor’s highest-status automotive technicians—a “senior master.”"

"Hummel said he earned about $160,000 in 2025. There is almost always a transmission for him to work on, and in the unconventional system for mechanics’ pay, Hummel’s efficiency means more money for him and for his dealership."

"The automotive industry has faced a shortage of mechanics for decades"

"Ford dealerships have 5,000 open jobs."

"the jobs can pay $120,000 a year, but they take five years to learn."

"Only a small sliver of mechanics stick around long enough to get to that level of pay. The work is physically grueling. It is costly to start because mechanics need tens of thousands of dollars worth of tools. And the starting pay is closer to fast-food wages than to six figures. The 2024 median pay for a dealership mechanic or technician in the U.S. was $58,580"

"Like most dealership mechanics, he [Hummel] had to buy his own equipment, frequenting “tool trucks” to finance thousands of dollars in gear on payment plans up to $200 a week. These days he owns his own tools, like specialized torque wrenches—required by Ford—that cost up to $800 apiece."

"The way pay works in most dealership service departments is essentially a piecework system called “flat rate.” Technicians are paid a fixed amount per job, regardless of how long the work actually takes. Making six figures requires working fast"

"Russell Wickham, a technician at a Chevrolet store in Indiana, worked for several dealerships across three states for about a decade. The most he grossed was about $89,000 in 2022, he said.

“There’s no guarantee,” he said. “If the customers aren’t coming in, they don’t have a problem letting you sit around because you’re not costing them anything.”"

"While car-repair costs rose 59% from 2014 to 2024, mechanic wages grew by 34% over the same period."

"The company [Ford] said it is working to address the mechanic shortage." 

A shortage is when the quantity demanded is greater than the quantity supplied and the price is below equilibrium. It seems like this could be the case since the wages are too low to attract enough workers. Ford says it wants to solve the problem. It might take higher wages. But market pressures should cause the wage to go up. If they are not going up then why not? Is there really no shortage? Hard to tell.

Related posts on supply and demand and shortages:

Does Boeing face a shortage of a temperature-regulating part? (2024) 

Drug Shortages in America Reach a Record High (2024)

Is There A Booze Shortage? (2022)

Car makers face ‘chipageddon’ (2021)  

Does the U.S. have a firefighter shortage (2021) 

There is no truck driver shortage in the US (2021)

Chicken Shortage Sends Prices Soaring, and Restaurants Can’t Keep Up (2021)

Is there a shortage of homes? (2020)

What Chocolate Shortage? Cocoa Prices Steady as Record Output Projected (2019)

Is there really a shortage of construction workers (2019) 

Was there really a shortage of meatless burgers? (2019)  

Is There A Christmas Tree Shortage? (2017)  

Is There Really A Honey Bee Shortage? (2013)

Will There Be A Pumpkin Shortage This Year? (2011)

Should you be true to your principles or values on the job? Conflicting advise from two recent articles

First, see Take Your Job and Shove It: Cheers to the six Minnesota prosecutors who resigned Tuesday. We need more of that by Matthew Hennessey of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"You’ll always regret violating your principles for the sake of a job."

"It doesn’t matter if you work in government or at a grocery store. If for any reason you can’t bring yourself to do the job you’ve been assigned, pack it in. Resign. It’s the honorable thing to do."

Then see ‘Don’t Be Yourself’ Review: Performance, Please: A psychologist argues that privileging ‘authenticity’ in the workplace can lead to bad outcomes by Philip Delves Broughton. He reviewed the book Don’t Be Yourself by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic. This also appeared in The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Mr. Chamorro-Premuzic lists four traps: always be honest, with yourself . . . be true to your values . . . don’t worry about what others think of you; and bring your whole self to work."

"these platitudes ignore human and organizational psychology"

"success at work demands inauthenticity and good social skills. If you want to be rewarded and promoted, you have to seem authentic, not be authentic."

"We should aim to express the version of ourselves that serves the moment and the people around us."

"If you come to work high on your own value system, it is likely you will ignore the values of others and fail to “coexist in harmony.” [this] reveals a selfishness, a lack of empathy."

The Economic Divide Between Big and Small Companies Is Growing

Economic fortunes of low- and high-income Americans are diverging—same pattern happening with companies

By Harriet Torry and Justin Lahart of The WSJ. Excerpts:

"Over the past six months, private firms with fewer than 50 workers have steadily shed jobs, according to payroll processor ADP, cutting 120,000 in November alone. Midsize and, especially, large firms have continued to add jobs."

"Net income for the large, publicly traded companies in the S&P 500 was up 12.9% from a year earlier in the third quarter"

"Small businesses—those with up to 500 workers—employ nearly half the American workforce and represent more than 40% of gross domestic product"

"an analysis of small-business bank accounts . . . found that earnings are slightly lower than they were a year ago."

"Small retailers . . . are struggling in particular with tariff uncertainty and continued cost pressures [which sounds like inflation is playing a role], said Andrew Chamberlain, chief economist at Gusto, a small-business payroll and benefits provider." 

"small businesses cut workers in both October and November"