Costly Meal of Tiger Steak

One of the most difficult discussions to hold with conservation-minded people is that markets can be designed to ensure the survival of some endangered species. Most arguments from such conservationists is to adopt the moral arguments about the need to conserve valuable species and ensure that there is proper bio-diversity. My understanding of this is that it is possible to design sensible markets that would ensure that many species that are endangered survive in good numbers and that some appropriate stabilization would follow. I have taken this argument on this blog in respect of tigers which I think are extremely regal animals which should be conserved through commercialization because markets are tiger-friendly.

I rehash the argument because I have read in this small article in the Irish Times about a man who was jailed for having killed and eaten what could have been the last wild Indochinese tiger. So Kang Wannian from Yunnan province of China has been sentenced to a ten-year jail term but one more valuable tiger has disappeared forever. The logic of commercialization suggests that it is possible to save more tigers by assigning property rights through auctions and allowing them to be owned and re-generated in sufficient numbers. The instinctive resistance to any form of commercialization is greater harm to tiger populations and leaves evidence of its futility. Given the scarcity of tigers, they should not end up as steak on a clam-collector's dinner table.

Gaza's Underground Economy

One of the enduring lessons that comes from the study of history and economics is that it is extremely difficult to extinguish any market. Guided by political choices that may be legitimate or not, decisions are made that make the operation of markets very difficult but that tends to alter it shape and structure without necessarily extinguishing them. The fascinating example of a market for smuggled goods through the tunnels connecting Egypt and the Palestine through Gaza is one of them.

Harriet Sherwood of the the Guardian reports here that a number of entrepreneurs are taking the risk of constructing tunnels between the two ends in order to transfer tangible goods through. This is interesting to a student of applied economics because the mere political decision to stop trade does not ensure that it disappears. Instead, the ingenuity of the tunnel constructors and their willingness to take risks by conveying motorbikes and other goods is instructive.

To my mind, both the governments of Israel and the Hamas who are in charge of Gaza have created the situation where the smugglers will trade underground if they must. The literal underground economy merely proves that the bans on imports and trade are not well-targeted and they ongoing underground trade shows that there's more to be smuggled than arms. The demand for motorbikes and other goods exists and the tunnels will continue to be expanded in order to satisfy this largely legitimate demand. In the process, a new class of entrepreneurs has emerged and they have little respect for unreasonable laws. Security concerns and safety do not require a wholesale ban on trade. active underground economies prove once more that wholesale bans are a blunt instrument.

Tiger's Sponsorship Cancellation A Mistake

Notwithstanding the fact that its all in the news, I was determined not to comment on any blog about Tiger Woods' personal affairs as I consider questions of personal behaviour to be important but not the business of anyone but Tiger's family. Looking at the update on the website of Accenture, I am quite appalled at the moral posturing that firms have taken with regard to Tiger Woods' personal affairs. In my view, it is important to have good representatives to base an excellent image upon but it is mere moral posturing to suggest that a sponsorship contract is necessarily threatened by this episode. This is the opportunity to politely assert that the athlete is different from the father and family person and the commercial relationship is all about his athletic ability.

What Accenture confirms to me is what i have always suspected. The whole set of ideas about building brands becomes high-sounding nonsense. Tiger Woods is still a phenomenon on any golf course and that is what attracted Accenture to him in the first instance. It is a mistake to run at the first sign of trouble because this may be emotionally devastating but unlikely to dim the athlete's capability to work when it is done. I wonder whether Accenture would also fail to offer business advise to clients who face similar transient and personal problems. Tiger woods is not the Pope or a Bishop but a golfer. This hurried reversal is Accenture's loss because Tiger will be back.

Tribute to Paul Samuelson

I have just read the news that prof. Paul Samuelson died at his home in his home in Belmont yesterday. Which student of economics, or college student who interacts with the students of economics never got to see and perhaps go through a few paragraphs of textbooks written by prof. Samuelson. Awarded the Nobel prize in economic Sciences in 1970, he heralded the rise of US dominance in research and thinking for the discipline. His award reads that he receives the honor "for the scientific work through which he has developed static and dynamic economic theory and actively contributed to raising the level of analysis in economic science."

Suing Casinos for Lost Bets

Reading the first paragraph of this story in the online version of the Wall Stree Journal, I asked myself the question that I have posed here numerous times. That question is: How come some very wealthy people are extremely gullible and even stupid? In a blog post with similar title here, I was asking why wealthy people allowed themselves to be duped repeatedly and over several years by Bernard Madoff and other crooks.

So reading that Terrance Watanabe lost US$ 127 million over a year through gambling at casinos made me interested in what kind of man he is. From that title alone, one would assume that he is probably a spoilt man who inherited a great fortune from his parents and spends most of his time having fun and burning that cash. To my surprise, his life is so different from that ready stereotype. It is true that he lost that amount of money at gambling and especially by playing the games with the worst odds and sometimes while heavily inebriated. He also spent too much time at a specific casinos in Las Vegas and was even turned away from one because he was losing considerable sums regularly.

Terrance Watanabe is a fascinating person for me because while he received the bequest of a small corporation from his parents, he dedicated himself to work at it that the business had revenues of up to US$ 300 million when he sold it. Having put in that much time and foregone many other things, it is clear to me that he knows the value of money and was probably able to tell that the odds at casinos are tilted against the player and that regular and affluent players would be especially vulnerable to tempting offers from casino managers. In an earlier blog post it was confirmed that one of the casinos has resorted to hiring a professor of economics as a manager. So Terrance Watanabe is certainly not daft but I still find it difficult to understand why a person with such business ability decided to take such bad odds. To my mind, the same amount of money would probably buy a minority stake in the casinos in which he lost a portion of his fortune. His suit against the casino owners will definitely fail and he may face a jail time too. Not a good end for a man who built an impressive business and sold it profitably. Perhaps it is true that any person who takes on casinos probably does not value money.

DARPA Network Challenge Proves that Prizes Rule

I heard about the challenge posed by the Darpa Network Challenge on a radio programme on the BBC and was intent on checking it out earlier this week. In a nutshell, Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency put of a competition with a prize of US$ 40,000 and a nine day time limit during which teams were expected to identify the precise locations of ten weather balloons randomly placed in public places within the United States.

My interest in this was peaked especially because of an ongoing interest I market design and the use of prizes as an incentive to developing solutions to business or public affairs. While I was sure that the prize would eventually be claimed, I am amazed at how quickly the contest ended. A team of MIT scholars claimed the prize within nine hours of its start and that is really efficient. As this story in the Guardian states, the team utilized incentives by splitting up portions of the prize and promising a windfall of US$ 2000 to anyone who send a verified clue of the location of a balloon. And to ensure that even those who do not directly identify a balloon are motivated to send the information around, there were smaller prizes for guiding the ultimate identifiers to the MIT team's website.

The full results about the organization of the search are not out yet but it definitely has other applications for it is a very clever design. What I find curious is that the team was sufficiently confident that it could share up to 50% of the total prize with the identifiers of the balloon and sit and wait for the correct and accurate information to reach it. making many assumptions, I am thinking that the MIT team could still have applied a reverse auction by inviting identifiers and asking them to auction their information. This would have had interesting results because it is possible that the price for identifiers could possibly have been less than US$ 2000.

Some Effects of the Land Rush

One of the consequences of the commodities boom is the renewed interest in intensifying farming activity throughout the world. This means that the value of agricultural land has gone up considerably with Africa and other developing countries seeing a rush in investment from large agricultural businesses. On the whole, renewed investment in Africa is not only an urgent need but also one of the main ways for fighting the poverty for the people. While written with some bias, this article in the Business week captures some of the difficulties that emerge from the investments related to the purchase or lease of land in parts of Africa. In spite of that, the piece reveals that there are a valid reasons why these investments need to be carefully calibrated due to underlying political and economic issues.

The merits and demerits aside of such deals aside, many people in Kenya and other parts of Africa are very uncomfortable with them since these investment deals are often negotiated between governments on the one side and investment firms that are taking possession of land on the other. So Dominion Farm's investments are definitely required but its managers are wrong to think that having a lease approved by government is sufficient because they find out that they are viewed with suspicion and even resentment. That is not good for investor relations and it shows very poor analysis on political risks and how it affects the longer-term viability of their investments.

I also think that to ensure success, these agreements ought to be as transparent as possible because land is still a political issue in most of Africa. There is still the tension between private ownership and communal ownership but on the whole, the western Kenya belt where Dominion Farms is based is completely adjudicated and therefore its people are largely comfortable with private ownership. This means that Dominion ought to have sought to negotiate directly with individual farms owners and should publish whatever the undertakings from either side are. I find it suspicious that Mr. Burgess claims to have negotiated with tribal chiefs when nobody bears such powers to negotiate over another’s land. So the piece is either incorrect on this or someone has made this up.

As stated in the piece and reiterated by the its response here, some of the targets that were established for Dominion Farms are altogether unrealistic. My thinking is that transition from homestead agriculture is necessary for significant welfare enhancement because there are too many people farming non-viable pieces of land in Africa. So it must be expected that enhanced farming techniques would lead to fewer farmers producing more to enable productivity gains to occur. So the leases should not come with promises for a target number of jobs and so Dominion Farms was at fault for accepting such a compromise. It should insist that it is purely an investment and not a welfare scheme and that's the reason I am unimpressed with claims that it intends to build hospitals and all that.

My assessment of the land lease phenomenon is that many investors in Africa and developing countries have failed to realize that the ability of governments to coerce citizens is surely fading. This means that investment deals cannot be based on the 1960s templates involving sweeteners to local officials, undertakings to establish infrastructure and then all would be fine. While I agree that land is an economic good too, these investors ought to be clear that their missionary zeal and sermons alone will neither ensure that they are admired nor that they get good returns. Contest for land ownership in Kenya, as in most of Africa, is particularly intense and any foreigner who enters that contest banking on government support alone is unlikely to be successful. Proper political risk analysis and how it affects investment viability is required for most of the land rushing corporations. I see that many of these projects will be difficult and possibly end in grief for investors.

Dubai's Crisis

Hindsight is always 20-20 so it is obvious that anyone claiming to have known all along that the Dubai's fast growth was bound to come to an end says nothing that is useful. A full year after the international financial crisis and the chastening lessons that it delivered to business forecasters and those who claim to know where the next boom will rise, the magic of Dubai seems to be fading too. Reading Daniel Gross in Slate magazine here, he argues that Dubai is more akin to Lehman Brothers than many realize or admit. Among the reasons for stating this similarity is the fact the leaders of both the principality and the corporation have been accorded great wisdom in financial management but this myth is now unravelling in a moment of crisis.

Adding my thinking to all this, Dubai was built on the sound premise that natural resources were not necessary to create prosperity for its people. However, unlike many who have maintained the chorus of platitudes about Dubai, I found its aim of growing pretty fast to be incompatible with serious curbs on individual freedom and the rights of immigrant workers providing labour at the construction sites. Sooner than later, there was going to be a formidable clash between the quest to grow quickly and the maintenance of a police state. Secondly, it is now clear that one of the main lessons of the financial crisis last year and the Asian Crisis of a decade ago are so difficult for many business professionals to grasp that they are repeated regularly. And that lesson is that a financial services hub cannot be created by executive fiat and also that real estate construction and investment is dependent on realizable demand. Huge investments in commercial real estate are effective ways of flaunting short-term prosperity but the debts that finance them should be carefully reviewed. I would guess that a significant proportion of the money lent for commercial construction in Dubai has been lost.

Now, these conclusions do not mean that Dubai is not capable of great growth in the future. Instead, it means that the sources for its growth will have to be diversified and that there will be a real estate overhang for a long time even after the city state recovers its growth. Building the world's tallest building for its sake can guarantee prestige for a while but it could turn out to have been a waste of resources and an effective destruction of wealth.

Sowell on Scarcity of Knowledge

"Knowledge is one of the scarcest of all resources in any economy, and the insight distilled from knowledge is scarcer still."
Thomas Sowell, Basic Economics (3rd edition) p. 95

Clash of the Super Retailers

Whenever the question about successful leverage of the Internet is posed, many people think very directly of Amazon, a corporation that started more than a decade ago by selling books over the Internet and has now grown into an true Internet colossus. And this corporation has extended its reach to the extent that it is now better described as a Internet retailer than as a bookshop. So by extending into the sale of clothes, electronics and magazines, Amazon has transcended the conventional description of an Internet bookstore and is more properly a mass retailer.

Amazon's retailing success has attracted the notice of Walmart which intends to contest the retail markets in the US and has started a price war on a number of consumer items. Brad Stone and Stephanie Rosenbloom write about the competition the NYT here, confirming that the two firms are now clearly on each other's radar screen as competitors and have taken the discount fight to a number of high profile books and electronic equipment. This price war has been most intense more recently and the analysts quoted in the story state that it is the case of either meeting its match.

As a student of economics and competition, it is fascinating to me that while Amazon has online retail muscle, in terms of revenues, it is clear that it can maintain the online fight for a long time. I also think that Walmart is probably the only business that could come close to even challenging Amazon in a commercial way. My thinking though is that none of these two will obliterate the other and that Jeff Bezos is probably right that there's enough space for more entrants. It is also clear that that this commercial jostling provides evidence that thee long-held view that physical and Internet stores were different is unravelling. Finally, it is clear that in an open economy, the competitors for any dominant firm can come from any other industry. While this fight is still at its incipient stage, the beneficiaries will be the consumers of the services and students of business who will no doubt be studying this as a case in business class.

Marking Two Decades After the Berlin Wall

Throughout the world, students of history and politics will today muse about the collapse of the Berlin wall and the ultimate collapse of communist rule in eastern Europe. The world will today mark two complete decades since then and a preponderant number of the world's population does not only have an idea about the difference, but many more seem to have forgotten what the age was like. I am unable to recount what it was like principally because I was yet a minor and had not developed an acute sense of what the events meant for human history in addition to the fact that I am not a citizen of Europe.

My ideas about the communist experiment that was undertaken most prominently in eastern Europe come from my reading about a decade ago of two important but nevertheless very different books. My understanding of socialism and its effects on the people who lived under it were was made quite clear by reading the first volume of The Gulag Archipelago. While I had not completely defined a coherent political philosophy then, I concluded that ideology informed the society that did that to other human beings was unacceptable and inhuman. Later, I came to read Friedrich von Hayek's The Road to Serfdom and came to understand an argument stating why socialism inevitably leads to the quest to dominate people and to coercion at all costs. Granted that von Hayek makes some bold claims that were not to bee, the general diagnostics and the reason that centralized planning is doomed to failure is stated as clearly as one can demand.

And this brings me to M. Tupy's essay here in which he writes about the meaning of the collapse of communism in eastern Europe. Having lived as a child and seen communism come towards it collapse as predicted by von Hayek, the essay tells stories from a perspective that I rarely encounter. It is pleasing to see that after a few decades of being subjected to life in communist paradise, even those who know no alternative, like Tupy's aunt, understood that the system cannot be good for most.

And so to my mind, one does the cause of human freedom greater service by circulating stories such as Marian Tupy's and Adriana Lukas here that would be recorded by a mere heated debate and vituperation that characterizes most debates about communism. It is just so true that all are deserving of freedom but freedom is not free.

SuperFreakonomics: Guessing Factor X

Leaving aside the controversy that has arisen from the ideas on geoengineering that have been included in the new publication by S.Levitt and S. Dubner, I think that most of the stories and the applications of economics thinking are informative. So while Elizabeth Kolbert has gone at the authors with hammer and tongs, I am convinced that the authors make a simple and correct case by stating the fact that the menu of solutions ought to be expanded beyond the fixation with a reduction in carbon emissions. I still have not made up my mind whether SuperFreakonomics is really better than its predecessor. One only has to make the decision whether it is worthy of spending the cover price on. My view is that it is definitely worthy of the sum since I do not own a Kindle 2 yet.

To my mind, besides annoying the environmental activists who have reduced the issue to a near dogmatic one, the book has also bettered the first by posing a challenge to its readers. The best chapter is the one covering the forensic work conducted by one Ian Horsely and Steven Levitt in trying to identify individuals with connections to terrorism from a data-set of a financial services institution. By describing the variables considered in whittling down the numbers in order to focus on the most likely suspects, it makes the reader really peer into the minds of both men. They go ahead to justify why indicators such as the purchase of life insurance is a valuable one for the algorithm and why other factors are not particularly helpful. Having considered a number of metrics, the authors describe how a certain variable "X" dramatically sharpened the algorithm and led to a group of 30 individuals with a high probability of involvement in terrorist activity.

The only clue offered is that the variable "X" is a qualitative one that measures the intensity of a certain banking activity. I have spent time trying to think about what this variable is and have not convinced myself that I nailed it. As far as trivia go, this is one that would capture the attention of many book clubs. Its only a pity that unlike the trivia questions appearing on the Amazon site, this one cannot be confirmed by the authors. On the other hand, anyone who is bright enough to deduce what it is would probably draw algorithms that would be useful in other ways. So I will keep thinking and will post my guesses here with the reasoning behind it. No terrorists need fear yet!

Will IT Centers Move to Rural India?

India and China are the countries on which forecasters and many other students of economics and development have cast their eyes for the next decade at the least. And to the many who are observing the great development experiment, India is cast as the country whose recent race into high economic growth is based on an services such as software development and business process outsourcing. China's huge advantage in manufactured exports is casually contrasted to India's intermediate dominance in export of services.

A major concern with India's development has been the fact that a large proportion of of its population is rural-based. So the service industries have been based in the main urban centers and therefore provided jobs to a minority of the labor force. Rightly speaking therefore, it is not clear whether India would be able to hinge its development entirely on the technology-driven service industries because they have so far not generated jobs in high quantities. Indeed, Mira Kamdar states in this book, Planet India that India's highly adulated information technology industry employed a mere 1 million people in 2007.

Lydia Polgreeen of the NYT has captured a new trend in India's technology industry. It appears that in the permanent quest for lower cost and the availability of literate people in India's less urbanized regions, firms are establishing offices away from Bangalore and Gurgaon, the traditional technology cities. Given the facts revealed in that story, there is internal competition for the most basic work and this drives the volumes towards the cheaper cities. To my mind therefore, there's anew dynamic in job creation in the technology industry and this will not only intensify competition within India's firms, but deliver greater efficiencies for firms that are outsourcing that work. So while there are no guarantees in development, this new frontier for IT work in India will lift more Indians from poverty.

Google's Dilemma: Buy or Make

Even putting aside the fact that this blog is largely made possible by a facility that Google makes possible, one could still dispassionately say that the corporation's employees are creative and display good business acumen. Reading this story in the NYT about Google's offer to purchase AdMob in exchange for shares worth US$ 750 million got me thinking about business strategy. To start with, it is clear that the Google seeks to expand the range of its revenues into as many personal devices as is possible and that has inevitably led to mobile phones. And so what Google has done is to conduct surveillance of the landscape and determine whether it needed to build a new device or acquire a separate corporation.

From the point of view of one interested in how businesses weigh decisions, I am wondering how these corporations strike a balance between building up a new service from scratch or acquiring a different entity at a fair cost. In the case under discussion, Google's offer is to take over the new corporation through a share swap hence with no cash changing hands. What draws my attention to this is that google will offer more than a million shares at today's price of US$ 566.7 per share in exchange for a corporation as it chases the opportunity to take up some space in the battle for shares in advertisements for mobile phones. Given the large number of engineers that google has, the calculations that inform this acquisition are unclear to me. I suspect that good managers are capable of considering when an acquisition would be a better deal than a complete buildup from scratch. In spite of this, I am intent to watch this transaction keenly as it would be important to se how Google leverages from computers onto the mobile phone advertisement space.

Related to the story of this transaction is the concern that Google is becoming the behemoth of the technology world and its competitors and detractors would like to see its freedom to make acquisitions checked. It is not clear to me that an acquisition of whatever kind would in itself guarantee Google continued dominance and therefore would not be particularly concerned about the quest to expand its footprint in the digital world. As Peter Osnos writes in The Atlantic, recent history suggests that Google is in a stage where it will have to be more careful to prevent overreach and concentrating on innovation.

Why Intel Should Negotiate a Settlement

Few people who watch technology very keenly are unaware that Intel corporation has been facing law suits in relation to its conduct towards PC makers. The variety of technical claims are complicated but in short, they suggest that this corporation has been paying PC makers not to use its competitors chips in their machines. The direct effect of this is that it forestall competition at the assembly stage and thereby harms the consumers of computers. As the story here states,the corporation has defended itself both in the EU and Japan but has faced heavy fines in both jurisdictions. That notwithstanding, the Attorney General of New York has also instituted a lawsuit against Intel on similar grounds.

As would be expected, the story reveals here the ongoing discussion because there are institutions and professionals pitching on both sides on the merits of the case. Judging from the outcome of the cases in both Europe and Japan, I think that the probability of Intel emerging from this case completely unscathed is low. And while I am reluctant to accept that business targets should of necessity be determined by courts, I think that the management and shareholders of the corporation should consider whether a vigorous battle in court is in the corporation's interest.

Again, in spite of my inability to tell fully how the case will be determined and what the size of any fines may be, I consider that Intel should negotiate with the DOJ and New York's AG. The reason for this is that the corporation will remain a strong competitor in the computer chips market and it should preserve its strength and management focus towards that. This view is informed also by the degree of disclosures that have been made about the conduct of the firm's employees which showed that they were aware that some of the business conduct was questionable. Finally, considering that the lawyers are properly schooled in competition law and would represent the firm competently, the history of these actions suggests that the case will probably be long and take up large sums of money.

So the advise is not to cut and run but rather to admit that management's time over the next few years should not be consumed with a trial of this kind. It is clear that in spite of its big fights in the same places, Microsoft did not do any better. Intel's management should show some intelligence here and choose its fights.

Cash for Clunkers Reassessed

Writing this blog post a while back, I stated that the Cash for Clunkers programme was a lesson in applied economics because it revealed that the subsidy itself revealed the preference for car models by Asian manufacturing firms in addition to the fact that the surrendered models were disproportionately those made by US car manufacturers. That blog post was incomplete to the extent that it makes the assumption that the overall programme was otherwise a successful one.

Well, I am now completely chastised, having read from no less than Steven Levitt here, that overall, the cash for clunkers programme was not an unqualified success. Referring to this data based analysis, it is clear the unquestioned attribution the entire set of sales to the programme is incorrect. As he states, there are a large number of acquisitions that would have occurred regardless of the programme. So what happened is that the subsidy merely led to a change in the moment of purchase for the individuals who already made plans to purchase new cars anyway. Taking account of this shift, the Cash for Clunkers programme ends up as a waste of resources.

A Sober Take on Ayn Rand

Among the most difficult things to communicate about popular books is that it is possible for an otherwise average author to tackle a profound subject brilliantly. And so while I define myself as a person who appreciates the profound insights by Ayn Rand, I am often left to wonder whether I read the same books as some of her greatest admirers did. My view of her books is that she writes about very profound matters through impressive characterization but I find her prose style a bit drab. And that does not then mean that her books are unworthy of reading, it is only that perhaps no writer could be gifted with all three qualities. In my view, the story telling is important because some of the most popular of Ayn Rand books are huge tomes and may be especially taxing when the prose is uninviting.

That notwithstanding, I find that Ayn Rand's books and especially the Anthem, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged tackle profound issues that are of significance for those wondering about the organization of society. With this in mind, I agree that some of the most strident arguments against her books are overstated while some of the adherents to her philosophy are equally exaggerators of her writing ability.

Governor Mark Stanford makes the same argument in this piece in the Newsweek Magazine where he starts by saying that he was equally impressed with the weight of the issues that the were covered in Ayn Rand's most popular titles. To my mind, the idea of individual ability and freedom should not be controversial and one that the books have examined in detail. Starting with the appropriate metaphorical ring of Atlas Shrugged, the books by this author address very profound issues regarding individual initiative and freedom as compared to statism and collectivism. I am less convinced of her absolute rejection of the role of government in public affairs but still think that the overall belief in freedom for the individual is an extremely valuable and empirically valid point. So while the Governor indicates that Ayn Rand too exhibited authoritarian traits within the organization that she formed, I respond with the view that this is a an equally profound manifestation of the contradictions of her life without negating the potency of a majority of her ideas.

No Business is Too Special or Too Big To Fail

"It is impossible for regulators to prevent business failure, and undesirable to pursue that objective. The essential dynamic of the market economy is that good businesses succeed and bad ones do not". John Kay

Economics and Vaccination

It is important not to stretch the many uses to which knowledge of economics at any level is useful for policy design. However, as I read this NYT article by Sarah Klein and Phyllis Greenberger, it just occurred to me that economics is more useful and is surely not just about money and aggregates such as the Gross Domestic Product. In their argument, they posit the results of studies stating that there are reasons of biology which makes women and men to require different doses of vaccines in order to achieve the required effect. Because the studies that they cite show that women's bodies are more efficient at generating a protective response from vaccines as compared to men, then this factor should be employed in the analysis of demand for vaccines.

They authors of the article argue eloquently as people with an understanding of human biology and health research but they do make a subtle but interesting economic argument based on optimum use of resources. I see two clear arguments that a student of economics would be impressed by. First is that in light of the fear that the flu vaccine for the H1N1 virus may not be available in quantities to cover everyone who would be most vulnerable, the consideration of the differences in biology are essential in ensuring that the greatest effects emerge from use of a given quantity of vaccine. The second argument is that it may be useful for public health professionals to consider whether the same proportions of men and women should be receiving the vaccines. So given the loud protests from some people who are reluctant to take vaccination, it does matters whether it is a man or woman who opts not to be vaccinated.

McDonald's Pulling Out of Iceland

I have recently had an intense interest in learning to design and test small algorithms that act as predictors of certain events or phenomena. The reason for this is to attempt to see whether through modest number crunching, these models would predict sports, political or business outcomes with any degree of accuracy. Taking forward those assumption, I would have considered that the income levels of a country, the degree of urbanization and locations north of the equator and the structural composition of the GDP would be a crude but passable predictor of the existence of a McDonald's restaurant in any country today. And while trying to be clever, I would not consider the predisposition of a nation's citizens towards the consumption of beef in that model because as I posted here a while ago, there are several McDonald's restaurants in Indian cities where beef is neither easily available nor widely consumed.

I am most surprised by this story in the Guardian that the McDonald's restaurants in Iceland will be closing down in a few weeks in spite of the fact that the country meets most of the criteria that I have enumerated above. The stated reason only makes sense to me by hindsight. It's become far too costly to Icelandic consumers to buy burgers when the Icelandic Kronor has lost value in relation to the Euro. These consumers therefore feel that difference in the cost of their burgers while the franchise loses opportunity for profits.