Friday, June 29, 2007

Lemon Markets

People blame Economists for their use of jargon even when expressing simple ideas. But nobody can blame us for lacking sense of humor when naming such ideas!

Lemon Markets is one good example. Believe me, the fruit market is not enough to award Prof. Stiglitz a Nobel Price in Economics. Instead, Prof. Stiglitz named Lemon Markets after those in which goods are apparently identical goods though they are not and (2) there information is asymmetric.

Think about used cars.

You can't tell the difference between two Silver 2005 Honda's parked in a store. Although used Honda's look all alike, anyone knows that a Honda driven by a retired Grandma is far more desirable than a Honda which had been driven by a 16yo as his first car. Still, in the store, they look the same. Therefore, the dealer must sell both by the same price.

Information is asymmetric because the seller knows what he is selling. But the buyer has no idea that one Honda belonged to Aunt May and the other to, say, Johnny.

Prof. Stiglitz has found that this type of market leads people like Aunt May not to sell her Honda. This happens because the price paid by the buyer for May's Honda is the same as Johnny's. But Aunt May knows her Honda is underpriced. She won't sell it for the price of the boy's who-knows-what-he-did-in-the-backseat-car. On the other hand, Johnny is quite sure his car is quite overpriced.

In a few years, there will be left only those carelessly driven Honda's in any used-car store.

And the same works for Ph.D. candidates. The funding institution cannot tell assess skills of different candidates applying for funding. They all look alike. They all have straight A's, outstanding GRE's, speak French and play sax. But they are aware they are not as homogeneous as one can expect from bottles of Coke. Some have taken non-accredited courses in Nuclear Physics, others have cheated in Crayon 101. None of these reach the academic records, available to the sponsor. Thus, whenever the funding institution lowers the stipend, the good guys quit.

And that is why Economists have named this type of markets Lemon Market: in the end, there are only lemons asking for funding. Grandma will give her old Honda to her grandson's 16yo birthday. But she won't sell it. Smart guys go sell themselves somewhere else. There are always companies eager for the Nuclear Physics aficionado. And the market end up full of Johnny's Honda's and Crayon 101 cheaters.

Of course, funding institutions can always make themselves some lemonade out of Crayon 101 cheating guys! But I am quite sure Harvard or Cambridge were not built out of lemons.

Important Note: Economic Theory has also found out that there are other reasons that motivate people to work rather than money. And that explains why there are still quite a lot of good people researching for fifteen hundred bucks! Like me, may I add!

Friday, June 22, 2007

The Secular State

By the time Pope John Ratzinberg reached Latin America, regional bishops in Brazil released an statement defending tighter dialogue between the Church and the Brazilian State, constitutional and secular. The plead accounts for recent attempts to legalize aborption, nowadays much closer to an economical rather than religious issue (so I believe).

The Brazilian bishops, obviously, count on a 74% catholic population. Most of which, though, nicknamed "Pink Catholics" by the Brazilian media, given their not-so-orthodox religious habits. Nonetheless, in spite of the pentecostal rise, the Pope still plays quite a large role within the less qualified majority, in a country where 40% of its citizens live below the poverty line (the 1 US dollar a day).

On the other side of the globe, Japanese bishops find themselves somehow tricked by a similar concern: they are struggling against the state for freedom of creed. Some Japanese ultra-nationalists are proposing a constitutional ammendment to ban non-Japanese religions.
And, in a country where aborption is widely accepted and practiced, and with fewer than 10,000 followers, their statement are far less intrusive.

Bishops in Brazil for the religious state and bishops in Japan for the secular state.
One can blame the church for incoherence about politics, both now and during its existence. But no word can be said about their persistence on what they believe to be the core teachings of their Lord.

Perhaps, that might be one of the reasons why they still play such a role in times which they do not hold an military army. Perhaps, there are stronger armies than military's.

For the curious, the statements are linked below (no translations available for the Brazilian).
http://www.cbcj.catholic.jp/eng/edoc/070221.htm
http://www.cnbb.org.br/index.php?op=pagina&chaveid=018a003

Friday, June 15, 2007

O Charme de 0,569

Em 1990, quando eu cursava o entao ginasio, o (grande) professor de geografia trouxe aa classe uma reportagem publicada na revista Veja (na epoca, leitura obrigatoria a qualquer estudante cuja ambicao incluia o nivel superior) intitulada "O Charme de 1,8%".

O numero se referia ao crescimento populacional do Brasil no ano e seu charme, argumentava o jornalista, constava na primeira vez em que o Brasil demonstrava um crescimento populacional inferior a taxa de reproducao, "tipico de primeiro mundo" (sic). Isso significa que duas pessoas colocam no Brasil menos de duas pessoas. No longo prazo, a populacao decresceria.

Passados 10 anos, o colegial e um diploma em Economia, o IPEA divulgou nessa semana o indice de Gini de 2004: "0,569". E o menor valor, desde que se tem noticia (isto e, dados confiaveis).

O Indice de Gini e um indicador de desigualdade de renda. Varia entre 0 e 1. Em uma sociedade em que todo mundo recebesse a mesma renda (digamos, o mesmo salario), o indice de Gini seria nulo. Por outro lado, em uma sociedade em que apenas uma pessoa receba toda a renda da sociedade, o Gini seria unitario (imagine um sheik arabe dono do unico poco de petroleo do pais).

O Brasil sempre esteve mais proximo ao caso do Sheik arabe. Os 2 milhoes de brasileiros mais ricos (1%) ganham mais de R$ 6.500/mes. Os 45 milhoes mais pobres ganham menos de R$ 300/mes. Se considerarmos o PIB brasileiro, os 5% mais ricos "ficam" com o dobro dos 50% mais pobres. Se 100 brasileiros produzissem 100 paezinhos, os 5 mais ricos comeriam 32 e os 50 mais pobres dividiriam 16. Numeros como esses fazem do pais o campeao da desigualdade, qualquer que seja o quesito (na verdade, o Brasil reveza o pior lugar da lista com a Suazilandia, um ex-bantustao da Africa do Sul).

Cabem todas as criticas ate o momento colocadas. O indice cntinua entre os tres mais altos do planeta (acima, inclusive, de reinados do petroleo, em que um sheik sozinho recebe praticamente toda a renda do pais), mas e um marco historico. Alguns economistas, claro, argumentam que nao seria historicament epossivel ultrapassar os niveis a que chegamos. Outros, que o indice reflete uma concentracao da renda, dada a reducao da chamada "classe media" (o que e possivel). Finalmente, alguns argumentam que a queda nao e estatisticamente significativa.

Qualquer que seja a conclusao, o numero nao deixa de ter seu charme.

(Isso nao significa que o Brasil seja um pais pobre: o brasileiro medio consome quatro vezes mais que um chines medio e tres vezes mais que um argentino medio. Na media. O problema e que ha poucos brasileiros medios: ha muitos pobres que sao muito pobres e ha poucos ricos que sao muito ricos. Se vc somar o tanto que os poucos ricos consomem com o pouco que os muitos pobres consomem, o brasileiro "medio" consome mais que um chines ou argentino.)