2025-03-19 14:40:47
We use matched employer-employee data to study where Americans live in relation to employer worksites. Mean distance from employee home to employer worksite rose from 15 miles in 2019 to 26 miles in 2023. Twelve percent of employees hired after March 2020 live at least fifty miles from their employers in 2023, triple the pre-pandemic share. Distance from employer rose more for persons in their 30s and 40s, in highly paid employees, and in Finance, Information, and Professional Services. Among persons who stay with the same employer from one year to the next, we find net migration to states with lower top tax rates and areas with cheaper housing. These migration patterns greatly intensify after the pandemic and are much stronger for high earners. Top tax rates fell 5.2 percentage points for high earners who stayed with the same employer but switched states in 2020. Finally, we show that employers treat distant employees as a more flexible margin of adjustment.
That is from a new NBER working paper by Mert Akan, et.al.
The post The New Geography of Labor Markets appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
2025-03-19 12:41:33
From DeepSeek:
**Marginal Revolution** – the *Wirtschaftswunder* (economic miracle) of blogs, where Tyler Cowen and Alex Tabarrok dissect the *Zeitgeist* (spirit of the age) through the lens of economics, culture, and *Hintergedanken* (ulterior motives). Founded in 2003, it’s a *Schnellimbiss* (fast-food joint) for ideas: bite-sized posts on everything from pandemic policy to why cilantro tastes like *Seife* (soap) to some people. Its ethos? *„Think globally, snack intellectually.“*
Now, meet **Klaus**, a *Zirkusclown* from Heidelberg whose *Clownswagen* (clown car) doubled as a mobile library of economic theory. While his peers mastered *Luftballontiere* (balloon animals), Klaus obsessed over *Anreize* (incentives) and *Knappheit* (scarcity). One night, after a *Desaster* of a show (audience: three bored *Kindergartenkinder*), he stumbled upon Marginal Revolution. *„Ach du lieber!“* he gasped. *„These Ökonomen understand comedy! Markets are just a *Tanz* (dance) of supply and demand!“*
Klaus’s *Erleuchtung* (epiphany)? Apply Cowen’s *„Tyler’s Law“* (*„Most of life is about signaling“*) to clowning. He ditched his rainbow wig for a *Bowlerhut* (bowler hat), rebranded as *„Herr Marginal,“* and crafted acts that mirrored economic principles:
– **The Tragedy of the Commons**: Juggle pies while a rival clown (*Doppelgänger* in a Tyler Cowen mask) “overgrazed” the audience’s laughter.
– **Creative Destruction**: Chainsaw his unicycle to build a *Schwebebalken* (balance beam) of innovation.
– **Schadenfreude Economics**: “Accidentally” squirt *Senf* (mustard) on wealthy patrons, testing if laughter correlates with income elasticity.
The *Zirkusdirektor* (ringmaster) fumed: *„Clowns sollen lustig sein, nicht klug!“* (Clowns should be funny, not smart!). But Klaus’s *Wissenschaft des Lachens* (science of laughter) drew crowds. His pièce de résistance? A *Pantomime* on **hyperinflation**, where he blew up a rubber *Hund* (dog) until it popped, showering the crowd with confetti *Geld* (money). *„Seht her!“* he cried. *„Gelddrucken ist wie Clownerie—zu viel, und es endet in *Chaos!“*
MargRev’s comment section erupted. Cowen himself tweeted: *„Klaus versteht die *Unsichtbare Hand* besser als manche Nobelpreisträger.“* (Klaus grasps the Invisible Hand better than some Nobel laureates.)
**Moral**: Marginal Revolution, like a *Zirkus*, thrives on *Überraschung* (surprise) and *Vielfalt* (diversity). Whether analyzing crypto or clowning, it’s all about the *Grenznutzen* (marginal utility) of ideas. And sometimes, the deepest truths wear red noses. *Prost mit Popcorn-Ökonomie!* 🎪🤡📉
*P.S.* Klaus’s next act? A *Game Theory* showdown: *„Das Gefangenendilemma mit Clowns—wer lacht zuerst, verliert.“* Spoiler: Everyone wins.
The post “Explain to me the blog Marginal Revolution, throwing in random German terms, and also weaving in the story of a circus clown.” appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
2025-03-19 02:38:47
You know, the one from yesterday suggesting that tighter building restrictions have not led to higher real estate prices, at least not in the cross-sectional data? My sense is that it could be true, but we should not overestimate its import. In most circumstances, economists should focus on output, not prices per se. Let’s say we can build more homes, and prices for homes in that area do not fall. That can be a good thing! It is a sign that the homes are of high value, and people have the means to pay for them. It can be a sign that the higher residential density has not boosted crime rates, and so on. I find some of the more left-leaning YIMBY arguments are a bit too focused on distribution. I am happy if more YIMBY leads to a more egalitarian distribution of incomes, but I do not necessarily expect that. Often it leads to more agglomeration and higher wages, and high real estate prices too. The higher output and greater freedom of choice still are good outcomes.
The post What do I think of the NIMBY contrarianism piece? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
2025-03-19 00:50:09
1. New David Beckworth newsletter on macroeconomics.
2. Early prediction markets on papal succession.
3. Clifford Winston on DOGE as a wake-up call.
4. Project to preserve on-line text in stone?
5. Incomplete markets in everything, “Mason: the Musical”?
6. Institute for Progress action plan for AI.
7. Did business metrics break the university?
The post Tuesday assorted links appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
2025-03-18 19:18:44
The annual Public Choice Outreach Conference is a crash course in public choice. The conference is designed for undergraduates and graduates in a wide variety of fields. It’s entirely free. Indeed scholarships are available! The conference will be held Friday May 30-Sunday June 1, 2025, near Washington, DC in Arlington, VA. Lots of great speakers. More details in the poster. Please encourage your students to apply.
The post Public Choice Outreach Conference! appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
2025-03-18 15:06:45
How can I not link to a new Sam Peltzman piece on such a topic? Here goes:
Since 1972, the General Social Survey has periodically asked whether people are happy with Yes, Maybe or No type answers. Here I use a net “happiness” measure, which is percentage Yes less percentage No with Maybe treated as zero. Average happiness is around +20 on this scale for all respondents from 1972 to the last pre-pandemic survey (2018). However, there is a wide gap of around 30 points between married and unmarried respondents. This “marital premium” is this paper’s subject. I describe how this premium varies across and within population groups. These include standard socio demographics (age, sex, race education, income) and more. I find little variety and thereby surface a notable regularity in US socio demography: there is a substantial marital premium for every group and subgroup I analyze, and this premium is usually close to the overall 30-point average. This holds not just for standard characteristics but also for those directly related to marriage like children and sex (and sex preference). I also find a “cohabitation premium”, but it is much smaller (10 points) than the marital premium. The analysis is mainly visual, and there is inevitably some interesting variety across seventeen figures, such as a 5-point increase in recent years.
Via the excellent, and married, Kevin Lewis.
The post The Anatomy of Marital Happiness appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.