Is Tiger's Comeback Complete Now?

Its not too difficult to notice that whenever a professional is accused of an indiscretion, then his achievements also become questionable. Tiger Woods is a perfect example of this phenomenon in action. I have stated that the details of his personal life apart, Tiger Woods remains an exceptionally accomplished golfer with a skills set that does not evaporate merely because he has suffered from the difficulties of his personal life. Soon after the events were exposed, this golfer took a long break and upon his return, the uninformed pundits and commercial sponsors assumed that his best days were over and that his professional targets would not be met because he was past his best.

As stated here and here, I have always maintained that this view was completely mistaken and that Tiger Woods still had sufficient time and capability to meet the grand objective of matching the record of 18 majors. Having enjoyed the peace that may come from media focus on his main competitors and the new boys on the block, this athlete has gradually and steadily worked his way back to second in the worldwide rankings. Lorne Rubinstein's piece assesses the steady climb up the ranks and reiterates my belief that Tiger Woods has the goal of 18 majors well within reach. iInterestingly, he adds that it is even possible that Tiger Woods' skill set has improved over time and that he is one tournament away from regaining number 1.

  

How are Locks and Software Alike?

In the early days after I started writing up pieces on this blog, I regularly mentioned my admiration for Bruce Schneier the writer of this blog, that security analysts with really unique view of security. He distills principles for security advice from both economics and technology and delivers very useful insights on what the causes and fixes for poor security both in the real and virtual worlds are. To my mind, two factors that he stresses again and again are that secrecy is not equal to more security and that there's a lot of security theatre which does not pass a cost-effectiveness test but it helps agencies and software makers to look busy and concerned. 

As required, inspiration for this blog post has occurred from my reading of the supremely interesting series of pieces on lock picking by Tom Vanderbilt on Slate Magazine. In the latest piece, the author discusses why it is virtually impossible to make a absolutely safe lock. Curiously, the conclusion is very similar to Bruce Schneier's two principles which asks for understanding that software and general security requires trade offs and also that notwithstanding the claims by lock makers, secrecy does not make a lock any safer from individuals intent on breaking it. 

Essentially, the series of articles by Tom Vanderbilt merely confirm the assertion by Bruce Schneier that principles of good security are important and that society would be better served if the principles were applied more generally. For general consumers of products such as anti-virus software and home owners, security requires trade offs and is an arms race of sorts. There is no absolute instrument to ensure that all households and all people are safe in all activities. Society would be much better if this fact was understood more broadly. 

Christina Romer Explains the Minimum Wage

Christina Romer presents a most coherent piece in the NYT that explains the effects of a minimum wage in terms of distribution effects. Apart from showing that the quest to improve income for poorer workers may be valid, the article shows that the distributional effects makes the overall effects more complicated than is immediately apparent. To start with, it is clear that the enhancement of wages may not all be appropriated by the poorest workers because some of the raise will be taken by younger workers who are residents of higher income households. In effect, as argued, raising the minimum wage in the US would also result in gains for those who work in minimum wage jobs but are not necessarily the most indigent workers in the US.

Equally profound is that the income gains may be real but that because poorer workers do not work on a full time basis, the policy change will not result in substantial economic effect relative to the US economy. Added to this point is that the consumption patterns of the lower income individuals suggest that most of that gain in establishments that employ the very individuals who are on a minimum wage. Understandably therefore, the price rise based on higher wages paid is absorbed disproportionately by this increase. Christina alludes to studies that show that a  minimum wage policy may have a negligible effect on overall employment but this possibly compensated for by the gains in productivity caused by the lower labour turnover.

In all, the analysis shows that the policy intent of the minimum wage policy is clear and perhaps morally defensible but the effect of instituting it is not necessarily positive for the people it is expected to assist. To my mind, the author states convincingly that by raising the minimum wage, the administration has left on the table more feasible alternatives.