Two short polls on work habits

I ran two polls on Twitter about work habits. These are not scientific polls that are representative of the American public. The people connected to me on Twitter are mostly economists and data scientists. The strongest claim that I could make is that these results tell us something about the kind of professionals who check Twitter regularly. We are all working from home even more than usual because of coronavirus restrictions.

The first poll was about when and if people who are working from home break for lunch. I usually want to break for lunch at 10:30am but push myself to hold out until at least 11am. I wondered if there is anyone else like me.

The next week, I was reading about a new fancy software that helps you organize your own notes and writing schedule. I mostly write notes in Notepad, a text editor from the 1980s! Should I get with the times? First, I thought I’d ask my respectable friends whether they have bothered to schedule their writing times.

Most of them don’t schedule writing. So, I’m just going to stick with Notepad for now. I’m definitely open to the idea that I would be more productive if I worked harder on productivity. Maybe next year I’ll start doing every thing right.

Kids Helping with Chores and Adult Time Use

This past weekend, my 5-year-old son helped us clean the house. Tasks include emptying the dishwasher, picking up clutter ahead of the robot vacuum, and cleaning bathroom surfaces.

Here’s the advice I bet you have heard before: Get your child involved in chores by the age of 2. It will take more work to get them to help than to just do the job yourself. However, you want to raise a child who can help. It’s good for them.

Something I have my two year old do is sort clean silverware. She pulls spoons out of the dishwasher basket and puts them with the other spoons in our silverware tray that we keep in the drawer. Redirecting her and motivating her to stick with this task takes a lot of energy. It would be much easier to just do it myself.

[I am writing this from a perspective of a “suburban mom”. If you live in a tiny apartment or a big farm, then this might not apply to you at all.]

There are two benefits to having kids do chores with you that I think are underrated.

  1. Your kids have to be entertained, and we are all trying to limit screen time. My son spent at least 2 whole hours total this weekend cleaning. Those are 2 hours that I would have had to fill somehow. The “easier to just do it yourself” argument fails to take that into account. It’s true that I could have parked in him front of a screen while I did all the cleaning myself, but to me that would have presented an additional challenge of getting him off the screen. I use TV as a reward for when the cleaning is done. And then no one feels guilty about anything.
  2. It’s more fun to do chores with your kid. I can fold laundry myself, but if my kid is helping me, then it becomes quality time. As a working parent, I really value quality time. When you do chores together, you get to know each other.

Imagine that I spend 10 minutes folding laundry by myself and then I seek out my son for 10 minutes of quality time with him. That’s 20 minutes total. I could just fold laundry with him. If it takes 20 minutes, then the laundry is done and the quality time has been had. Will he spend most of his time rolling around in the clothes and whining that it’s hard to match socks? Sure, he will. But that presents opportunities for us to chat and overcome obstacles together. I could pay $1,000 for a white water rafting trip when all I wanted was some quality time and some obstacles to overcome. Folding laundry together is free. The only antic I will not tolerate is for the child to destroy a pile of clothes that I have already folded. Other goofy antics are allowed.

I understand that some of my readers outsource housework. I believe in the specialization of labor. More power to you. Some of my readers probably should be outsourcing more than they do.

My advice is, if you are doing thing like laundry and dishes and cleaning in-house, don’t do it alone. Getting your kids involved is less costly in terms of your own time than you might think.

Tip A: Do not expect your child to be efficient and hurry through their job. She might lie on the floor for 20 minutes before even starting. If you try to hurry kids you are setting everyone up for miserable failure.

Tip B: Be flexible. Technically, we are supposed to clean the whole house together on Saturdays. Sometimes the jobs bleed into Sunday if Saturday is busy. Sometimes I’ll do one task myself on Friday. Routine is helpful, but do what works for you.

Probably Proportions

Statistics is hard…

I want to share a conversation about proportion Vs. probability.

My friend, Corey DeAngelis, has a new research paper that measures the link between school district unionization and in-person re-opening in the time of Covid-19.

He promoted it on Twitter – but little did he know that a member of the statistics police was on patrol…

Am I splitting hairs? Of course I am. Do most people know what he means? I think so. Is the distinction important? You betchya.

Corey, sent me a private message with the appropriate response:

Oh, yes – really.  Speaking probabilistically when we don’t have all of the information is so very tempting. To us the observer, lots of things appear probabilistic to us that are deterministic in nature (Have you ever played the board game “Don’t Wake Daddy!”, “Hot Potato”, or “Musical Chairs”? There is a process that determines when daddy will awaken or when the music ends). Not knowing the underlying process makes the experience appear probabilistic. But appearances can be deceptive.

Often, people speak as if they are taking a random draw from a sample. That can be probabilistic.  Given a draw of school districts, the likelihood of selecting an opening school from non-union districts is greater than choosing an opening school from a union district. This is entirely right. What is not right is saying that teacher-unionized districts are “more likely” to stay closed.

The decision to stay closed or to open is a product of collective choice – the decisions of several parties with diverse interests. Of course, we don’t know every single influence on the decision. But we do know that the outcome follows a pattern. A lower proportion of schools open in teacher-unionized districts than the proportion in non-union-districts.

Researchers often talk about their sample as if it is reality. A random draw from a sample has a probability. Nobody is randomly drawing an actual school district and expecting a probabilistic process to determine the policy outcome. Just ask yourself: “Does the sample proportion tell me an empirical probability?”

*Note: This is why we have different language when using a standard normal distribution.

“What proportion of area is to the left of z*=1.5?”

“Given a random draw from a standard normal distribution, what is the probability of selecting a value that is less than 1.5?”

One describes randomness. The other describes an already determined outcome.

Note: Yes, this kind of behavior does have implications for one’s popularity.

Thoughts from the 55 hour non-stop ESA Conference

I am a long-time member of the Economic Science Association, if someone my age can be a long-time member of anything. This is an excellent group of people. The leadership team designed a virtual replacement for what would have been an annual in-person conference.

The first time I saw the schedule it seemed epic. The schedule runs for 55 continuous hours. There is an Asia-Pacific period, which from my perspective in the US starts at night and goes “late”. I would stay up to tune into some of those events. The European time period was during the very early morning in the US. People were given a presentation slot that occurred as a good time of “day” for them.

Here’s a tweet quote to demonstrate the dedication to helping us all keep track of what was going on:
Another #2020ESAGlobal Conference Hang-out. For 2 hours at 6am L.A., 9am New York, 3pm Paris, 9pm Bejing, 11pm Melbourne.

The willingness to think outside the box and take advantage of the virtual format impressed me. It seemed like there were trying to make everyone in the world feel included.

Virtual conferences are not the same as in-person. I prefer in-person conferences and I will return to in-person experiences when I can.

There are advantages to virtual conferences. I’m not the first person to notice this, nor am I the first person to wonder if there will be more virtual conferences after the pandemic has completely subsided.

Working parents face certain costs and benefits to leaving for a conference. Working parents enter a totally different world when they fly away from their domestic responsibilities and attend an in-person conference. The flying is expensive and the domestic responsibilities have to be taken over by someone. Nothing if free. The benefit is that the working parent has an opportunity to focus on their profession which I consider to be valuable.


In a special social session, I had a chance to hear Ryan Oprea talking. I’m going to make a plug here for all of his work. He’s incredibly smart and dedicated to his craft. He’s generous with good ideas and practical help. Maybe you haven’t heard of him if you are Very Online, because instead of tweeting out hot takes he’s writing enduring research papers and doing professional service.

Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin Interview

Birmingham, Alabama Mayor Randall Woodfin is one to watch. The city of Birmingham has been on the rise, although like all cities Covid has presented a major setback. Here’s a Rolling Stone feature on his role in removing a confederate monument from the city in the summer of 2020.

My university president recently sat down for an interview with him (35 minutes long). Mayor Woodfin talks about influences that shaped him and how he ended up in politics. He emphasizes personal experience in community service and politics as customer service. They discuss governance in the time of Covid, both the health and financial angle.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbsfS3MSoUk&feature=youtu.be

There are lots of books on race going around these days. Mayor Woodfin’s recommendation is Caste.

The city does not get much attention on the international stage. The fact that we share a name with a much larger city in the UK is problematic in a way. It’s our fault, because we stole the name from them in an attempt to assert our dominance in the steel industry over one hundred years ago.

Yglesias ‘One Billion Americans’ CWT podcast

I have been looking forward to this podcast. It dropped today. I was too busy “at work” (I work from home on Wednesdays) to listen. Then in the evening I wanted to tell my kids that I could not sing “Wheels on the Bus” another time for them because I had a podcast I really wanted to listen to. Of course that doesn’t really work with a toddler. The upshot is that I’ve only listened to half of it.

Here’s a quote that I thought was interesting

There could be a lot of benefits to that. I went to Ireland. It was the last international trip I took. It’s a beautiful country, very successful in a lot of ways, but obviously, a really empty country. If you’re working on a book about a billion Americans while going across from Dublin to Galway, I could not help but be struck. It’s like, “Where is everybody here? Couldn’t we do more?”

Matt Yglasias

One of the interesting questions when you think about packing more people into prosperous countries is why must we focus on making congested cities larger. There really is a lot of land around.

I know of “blighted” neighborhoods near me that already have streets and ample parking and just everything that you could want except rich neighbors. The shrinking cities in cold places seem like the ideal candidates for where more people could go.

I haven’t read Matt’s new book. I do not endorse it, since I don’t know what is in it. However, I like the fact that he has a vision, and I’m excited to read it.

Money as a Social Construct

Wikipedia offers the following definition of “money”:

Money is any object or record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given socio-economic context or country. The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value.

To illustrate why all advanced societies use money, let us consider a village which operates on a barter system. (Many primitive cultures probably operated on a basis of mutual gifting rather than strict barter, but that does not affect the point at hand). Suppose the baker has produced two loaves of bread that will go stale in a day, so they would be best sold today. The baker would like a pair of sandals from the cobbler. They agree this is a fair trade, but the cobbler is backed up and will not be able to make the sandals for a couple of days. Thus, they cannot immediately make a swap. For this mutually advantageous transaction to proceed, the cobbler must agree to the obligation to deliver something (namely, a pair of sandals) in the future, in return for the loaves of bread today. The baker must believe that the cobbler will deliver on his promise.

Here we see the importance of credit and debt, which depend on mutual trust, to enable transactions where there is a time lag between the actions of the two parties. The cobbler’s promise may just be a verbal agreement, but now suppose the cobbler writes down on a piece of paper, “The holder of this certificate is entitled to one pair of sandals from me, the village cobbler,” and gives this to the baker. Now this piece of paper is nearly the equivalent of a pair of sandals in value. It has become a store of value. If the baker later decided that he would rather have some candles instead of the sandals, he might be able to exchange this certificate for the candles. Thus, this piece of paper, which started as a statement of a debt between two individuals, would serve the function of money. (In fact, such “bills of exchange” issued by merchants were an important form of money in late medieval Europe).

It would be even cleaner if the baker could simply sell the bread to the cobbler for something that functioned in that village as “money”, such as silver coins. The baker could then use some of the coins to either buy shoes or buy something else, either now or later.  In this case, the coins operate as a convenient medium of exchange and also as a store of value. Both functions enormously aid financial transactions, which is a reason that money is so ubiquitous. Money also facilitates taxation by central governments, so governments have an incentive to put a monetary system in place.

In Money We Trust

For this system of money to work, the key players all have to believe in the value of the silver coins. Thus, money is a mainly social construct, an article of mutual faith.

With the rise of banking in the Renaissance, banks issued paper certificates which were exchangeable for gold. For daily transactions, the public found it more convenient to handle these bank notes than the gold pieces themselves, and so these notes were used as money. People generally trusted that the banks actually did have the gold in their vaults; if people lost confidence in the bank notes, they would all come at once to demand their gold in a “run” on the bank, which usually did not end well.

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, leading paper currencies like the British pound and the U.S. dollar were theoretically backed by gold; one could turn in a dollar and convert it to the precious metal. Most countries dropped the convertibility to gold during the Great Depression of the 1930’s, so their currencies became entirely “fiat” money, not tied to any physical commodity. For the U.S. dollar, there was limited convertibility to gold after World War II as part of the Bretton Woods system of international currencies, but even that convertibility ended in 1971.

Many older Americans and Europeans have a gut feeling that gold is “real” money. Its main advantage over fiat currencies is that there is only a limited world-wide amount of it, so it cannot be multiplied at the whim of some government or market force. However, even gold is just a shiny yellow metal whose value is whatever people believe it to be.

Money and Social Order

There are “preppers” who hoard gold coins, expecting that in the apocalypse they will be able to purchase goods with gold. But who knows how many gold coins it would take, in such a scenario, to buy a can of beans? Or if you show up in town flaunting gold coins, how long before the local warlord’s gang comes calling at your doomstead? I suspect in such a scenario society would revert back to using “commodity money”, using items with real alternative value, such as AA batteries, food items, or ammo.  In the 1700’s frontier, beaver pelts, which had intrinsic value, were used as a common denominator for pricing and exchange.

If people lose faith in the value of some form of non-commodity money, it will in fact become valueless. For instance, during the American Civil War of 1861-1865 both the North and the South issued paper currency to fund their military efforts, since neither side had enough gold to pay their soldiers and suppliers of military goods. These were both fiat currencies, not at the time redeemable in gold.  The North retained its government and a strong economy, and only a portion of its money stock was paper, so it experienced only moderate inflation. However, towards the end of the war, with excessive printing and with defeat of the Southern Confederacy in sight, the Confederate dollar lost nearly all its value. People no longer wanted to accept Confederate dollars in exchange for real goods, since they (rightly) feared that they would be unable to exchange the “greybacks” for the same amount of real goods in the future.

As long as a given government remains in power and does not issue crazy amounts of money (as in post WWI Germany or recent Zimbabwe), or some catastrophe does not strike, fiat currencies tend to remain in use. The value of fiat money derives in part from a government declaring that it must be accepted as a form of payment (“legal tender”) within that country, for “all debts, public and private”. The government typically requires that its citizens come up with some amount of its currency to pay their taxes, so that automatically creates some level of domestic demand for the currency.

Today, most “money” is not even tangible printed bills, but is in the form of digital entries in accounts “somewhere”. Nearly all of my life savings exists in the form of investments in stocks or bonds of corporate entities, which are held in accounts that I only ever access from my computer. I rely on on-going functional, reasonably honest government to enforce rules on the stewardship of those funds at multiple levels. So I am betting everything on the supposition that law and order prevail.

The Most Valuable Class I Took

In middle school, when I was about 12, I had a rotating non-academic period in my schedule. For at least 6 weeks, I can remember we had a typing class. We would go into the school computer lab and practice “touch typing”. I typed the letter “f” with my left index figure hundreds of times. They made us put a cover over our hands to force us to practice typing without looking.

I resented that class. I hated taking the long way round. I hated typing the letter “f” over and over. Since it’s so boring, I don’t know if I would have forced myself to learn QWERTY touch typing. Part of the value of school is a framework in which you do things that you don’t have the discipline to do on your own. (Tyler Cowen has written somewhere about teachers as coaches, but I could not find the link.)

Looking back, this is the most valuable thing I did in school. I’m writing this post almost as fast as I can think of the words.

Learning to type is not useful if you can’t read or write. I’m not saying that nothing else I did in school was valuable. Also, I recognize that this would not be the most valuable class for every student.  

There is the potential for Speech to Text to make touch typing obsolete. I don’t think I would work better that way and I do not personally know any professionals who write using Speech to Text.

I have seen a Trump boat parade

Are boat parades a previously underexploited means of advertising? I quickly Googled Trump boat parades before posting this and found that just about every news outlet in the country, large and small, posted about them recently. They get noticed.

I was at a harber town in Florida for the weekend and you notice the Trump boats. I saw one large yacht with a cut out of President Trump and Melania on the deck. When the boat is going away from you it almost looks like Mr. & Mrs. are on board.

I’m the kind of person who likes to ask obnoxious questions. I asked a boat captain who works in the harbor if he had ever seen a Biden boat. He laughed at me. No. In case you were wondering, although many Americans plan to vote for Biden, none have rigged up a Biden boat to compete with the Trump regatta.

I am reminded of a classic movie “The King & I” in which the young prince says that his first act as king will be to order a celebration with fireworks and boat races.

A Covid Conversation… But with Humility.

We know WAY more about Covid-19 than we used to. But there is plenty of appropriate and inappropriate incredulity concerning the data meaning, validity, and implication. I want to take a minute and give it the good ol’ Stat – 201 college try. Here’s the level-headed and appropriately humble Covid statistics conversation.

A: “The US has more cases of Covid than Portugal.”

B: “Yes, but that’s not important. They are very different countries. After all, 65% of people in Portugal live in urban centers. For the US, that number is 80%. Obviously, people being close together, such as in urban places, will contribute to more Covid cases.”

A: “OK. Fine. They may be incomparable. But the US has more cases than the UK, which has a similarly urban population of 83%.”

B: “Yes, but the US is larger. The UK has a smaller population – Of course the US has more cases.”

A: “Ah! And the US also has a Covid positivity rate well in excess of the UK.”

B: “Hmm… That is something. The problem is that the testing is not administered in the same fashion in both places (or across time). That is, neither set of tests is a simple random sample of people and neither is biased in sampling in the same sort of relevant ways.”

A: “But how do you know that the samples aren’t collected in the same sort of ways? Someone feels poorly, then they go and get tested. Isn’t that how is works everywhere?”

B: “Not necessarily at all. Some countries and municipalities offer free testing. Other places have more or less scarcity of tests and surely that affects whom they decide to test. Not only that, different people are differently willing to get tested (maybe they’d have to involuntarily stop working, for example). My point is that the testing samples are not both biased in favor or against positives in the same way and we have little way of telling either the direction or magnitudes. The fact that both countries test a similar proportion of the population doesn’t address the sampling method.”

A: “OK. Well, I suppose that we ought not try at all then, according to you? Isn’t some problematic data better than none?”

B: “Problematic data is not better than none at all if we have good reason to think that there isn’t enough in common between sample collection methods to make valid comparisons.”

A: “Right, so you’re saying that we have to be agnostic.”

B: “In some sense, yes. But rather than Covid cases, we can track relevant variables whose sampling is more comparable. Hospitalizations are better, but we still have the issue of selection bias among those being admitted and a bias due to different hospital capacities between localities. The best measure is the number of deaths due to Covid. People can’t elect out of that sample.”

A: “Hm… Ok. But while total deaths is a more dependable statistic, it is less relevant. Of course deaths matter a great deal, but Covid makes people feel terrible and may even have long term effects.”

B: “You’re right. Covid deaths Vs cases has the trade-off of relevance Vs dependability. Arguably, deaths are the most important possible symptom – although I take your point that it’s not the only relevant symptom. Ultimately, however, the death numbers are more dependable and we should use them if we want a high degree of certainty.”

A: “Fine. The US has more Covid deaths than does the UK, both in level and in deaths per thousand of population.”

B: “Yep. You are right. But the US has more Covid cases, so of course it has more Covid deaths than the UK. The correct statistic is, given a Covid diagnosis, how likely are you to die of Covid? In the UK, a much higher proportion of people with a Covid diagnosis die. In other words, Covid is more dangerous in the UK than it is in the US.”

A: “Time out. Two things: 1) Didn’t you say just a moment ago that the testing data wasn’t reliable enough? Now you’re using it as if it’s reliable. 2) If we are making a cross country comparison, then can’t we just say that a person, randomly drawn from the population, is more likely to die from the Covid in the US than in the UK?”

B: “Mea culpa. You’re right on both points. At the end of the day, a US person is more likely to die of Covid. But, in the UK a person with Covid may be more likely to die. So what do we do about that?”

A: “Good question…”