Condo Building Collapse in Miami: Causes and Consequences

Everyone has heard of the terrible tragedy in Surfside, a suburb of Miami, where a large portion of a twelve-story beachfront condominium building suddenly collapsed. As of July 5, 32 people were confirmed dead, with over 100 still missing and likely dead in the rubble. As an engineer (not a structural engineer) I am interested in what caused this structural failure. I’ll share what seems to be the latest intelligence on that. I will also offer a speculation on possible economic ripples of this event: what if confidence is lost in the structural integrity of other Miami beachfront condos?

Here is the before:

Source: Wikipedia

Continue reading

Happy Fourth of July

Like most works of genuis, the Hamilton soundtrack is the result of much deliberate work. I just watched the documentary called “Hamilton: One Shot to Broadway”.

In one of the interviews with creater Lin-Manuel Miranda, he explained how he wrote each character with a different msuical style. George Washington has lines that sound militaristic, as opposed to the synchopated complex raps that Alexander Hamilton spits out. Hamilton is not merely undifferentiated “hip hop” music. Miranda used jazz music to inspire the Thomas Jefferson solos.

If you have already enjoyed the Disney+ recorded version and/or the soundtrack, then I recommend the documentary as an extension of the fun.

Happy Independence Day from EWED!

Results on stability and gift-exchange

Bejarano, Corgnet, and Gómez-Miñambres have a newly published paper on gift-exchange.

Abstract: We extend Akerlof’s (1982) gift-exchange model to the case in which reference wages respond to changes in economic conditions. Our model shows that these changes spur disagreements between workers and employers regarding the reference wage. These disagreements tend to weaken the gift-exchange relationship, thus reducing production levels and wages. We find support for these predictions in a controlled yet realistic workplace environment. Our work also sheds light on several stylized facts regarding employment relationships, such as the increased intensity of labor conflicts when economic conditions are unstable.

Next, I will provide some background on gift-exchange and experiments.

Continue reading

The Question of When to Act

The collapsed condo building in Florida has been in the headlines for days. Two recent reports come from USA Today and the WSJ.

This is a tragedy that will be associated with many deaths. A steady decay in the concrete structure appears to the be the cause, although there is no professional consensus on the reason for the sudden collapse (see WSJ).

In 2018, an engineering firm recommended repairs in a report. Every 40 years, a building like that needs to be re-certified, and the tower happened to be 40 years old when it collapsed. The recommended repairs had not started.

According to USA Today, a letter circulated in April 2021 (two months before the collapse) warned condo residents that expensive repairs were necessary. Meetings were being held. The condo board was gathering information from engineers and lawyers.

A line from the letter is chilling (see USA Today):

We have discussed, debated, and argued for years now, and will continue to do so for years to come as different items come into play.

Continue reading

Editing: You Figure It Out

If you want to change how a field works, you have a few options. You can do what you want to see more of, but you are only one person, and perhaps not the one best equipped to make things better. Or you can encourage others to work differently- but why would they listen to you?

Academics often serve as peer reviewers for the work of others. If a reviewer recommends that a paper be rejected, it usually is; if you recommend specific minor changes they usually get made. But you can’t really tell people that they should work on a totally different topic. Journal editors for the most part simply have a scaled-up version of the powers of peer reviewers to steer the field. But unlike reviewers, their positions are public and fairly long-lasting. This means they can credibly say “this is the sort of work I’d like to see more of- if you do this kind of work, there’s a good chance I’ll publish it”.

This is part of why I’ve been hoping to be a journal editor some day, and why I’m excited to be guest-editing for the first time: a special issue on Health Economics and Insurance for the Journal of Risk and Financial Management. The description notes:

Continue reading

Steve Horwitz on “The Graduate Student Disease”

On Sunday the world lost a great teacher, economist, and all-around fantastic person in Steve Horwitz. If you don’t know about Steve, I recommend reading the tributes from Pete Boettke and Art Carden.

Pete and Art speak to Steve’s overall legacy and greatness. But I will tell you about a very specific piece of advice that Steve gave me about teaching undergrads.

Steve called it “the graduate student disease.” By this he meant the tendency of newly minted PhD economists to teach undergraduate courses as if they were mini versions of graduate courses. Steve insisted this was the wrong approach.

Continue reading

1970’s SNL on the Problem of Inflation

Any student of economics knows that inflation emerged as a big issue in the late 1970’s, first under the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The newly minted Saturday Night Live rose to the occasion. First, Dan Akroyd as Jimmy Carter proposed that that every American take 8 per cent of his or her money and burn it (Season 3, Episode 17, 4/15/1978), to reduce the money supply.

The President demonstrated leadership here by burning 8% of the $12.50 in his daughter’s little peanut bank:

A few months later (Season 4, Episode 4, 11/4/1978), the President changed his mind. Since austerity did not seem to be working, he offered a new approach – –  “Inflation is our friend”:

Continue reading

DIY and The Limits of Comparative Advantage

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the perils of over fetishizing comparative advantage and outsourcing in our personal lives, which is a long way of saying I bought a Sodastream.

Like many economists, I am wary of self-congratulations for doing something yourself. Don’t get me wrong, hobbies are good, but we shouldn’t suffer the delusion that making a table yourself is a particularly good use of your time. And, so help me god, if I hear you diminish the merits of any restaurant offering because “you could make for yourself for half the price” I will slap the menu out of your hands, hand you a crisp ten dollar bill, and send you home to make your own damn meal.

My loyalty to economics thus declared, I must say there is a case to be made for making exactly the thing you want. Ricardian comparative advantage- I make my low opportunity cost item, you make yours, we trade, everyone wins, it’s important at the micro and macro of our lives, but the bulk of rewards to purchasing private goods in the market instead of producing them yourselves is from the comparative advantage derived from specialization, capital, and scale. It would take me hours to make a batch of homemade Oreo-style cookies, but it’s pretty silly when you consider there are billions of dollars in technology, capital, and expertise dedicated to making just those specific cookies. Unless I were to get some sort of meditative three-steps-of-self-actualization-on-the-path-to-nirvana value out of the process of making those cookies, I’m far better off just grabbing a couple stacks at the grocery store and paying a professional to help me process the shame.

But what if I don’t want exactly the product being offered? Everything comes with a cost, and that includes scale of production. Nabisco sells $550M of just Oreos every year, but they don’t do that by trying to sell them to everyone. It might seem that way, but they really don’t. Yes, I know they have 25 flavors now, so yes, they having expanded into narrower niches since their single-flavor days, but their target remains the 4.29 million Americans consumed 8 or more packages in 2020. If you want to sell a half-billion dollars worth of cookies, you need to sell them cheap, and that means you need to sell a lot of them. You don’t sell a lot of cookies going door to door asking people what they want and then giving it to all of them. You sell a lot of cookies by hunting for the middle of the distribution. Observed used to call the implied bullseye here the lowest common denominator, but now that we are fully-evolved humans who don’t need to sneer at what most people want, we can simply say that sellers are looking for a part of the distribution of preferences with enough mass to support your business.

In soda-land, that means you are definitively not selling to me. Coca-Cola is a literal miracle product, but its also obesity-in-a-can for 43-year-old dudes who count walking somewhere as exercise. I enjoyed the “TEN” calorie product series, but those lasted less than 3 months on the market and probably ended the careers of no fewer than a two dozen career soda executives. At the other end of the sugar spectrum, I don’t like a lot of the Lacroix flavors and they tend to be over-carbonated for my precious bubble-specific sensitivities. Where is the perfect soda for those of us who want 1 to 3 grams of fructose from real fruit juice suspended in a matrix of lightly-bubbled seltzer water?

Where it’s not is the marketplace. That’s fine, the world doesn’t owe me exactly my preferred bundle of product dimensions in everything I consume. I wouldn’t want them to either. Like most people, if the market did ever produce a good just for me, I couldn’t afford it. We need the scale that comes from meeting lots of wants all at once, even when those wants don’t perfectly match my own.

And that’s why we buy Sodastreams. And woodworking tools. And sewing machines. And pizza ovens. Sometimes we go DIY not because we’re denying the merits of comparative advantage, but rather because we’re accepting that there of some products where second-best market solution just won’t cut it.

Which, by the way, is one of the great ironies of modern life in a developed economy. We’re so rich, we can absorb the opportunity cost of our hobbies and weird DIY hyper-niche consumption preferences. We can make our own stupid mole-cherry-lime soda at home because that’s what we want. Because in the modern world, the greatest bourgeois luxury isn’t the stuff you buy, it’s the stuff you make yourself.

Philosopher dude, c. 1770

This joke is relevant to the recent discussions within the economics profession about rigor in research. It’s also just funny and shouldn’t be lost, as so many memes quickly are.

The worst philosopher dude offender is Rousseau. Rousseau is cringe.

Here are his misleading thoughts from the bath about primitive humans, “The produce of the earth furnished [man] with all he needed, and instinct told him how to use it.”

A quick search about primitive humans brings up this from Psychology Today:

The caveman diet is a great diet if you want to live to be 30 or 35 years old. That was the adult life expectancy until very, very recently (indeed, it wasn’t until well after the advent of agriculture that life expectancies began to rise—in agricultural communities!). We know this from skeletal evidence.

The data is very sketchy on primitive life. However, there is no reading of the available evidence that makes it sound like people were well-provisioned to care for themselves and their children. This BBC article provides more sources on life expectancy throughout history.