Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
I don't think so. More likely, they will provide additional hours for science with additional fee (rich) parents are more than happy to pay.
Or, private sectors will spot market for private course on science, especially for those wealthy parents whose kids are enrolled in public schools that have to follow the instruction.
By the end of the day, well-off kids get more science -- so much for a new curriculum that cuts science.
Sunday, December 09, 2012
This paper measures the economic impact of climate change on US agricultural land by estimating the effect of random year-to-year variation in temperature and precipitation on agricultural profits. The preferred estimates indicate that climate change will increase annual profits by $1.3 billion in 2002 dollars (2002$) or 4 percent. This estimate is robust to numerous specification checks and relatively precise, so large negative or positive effects are unlikely. We also find the hedonic approach—which is the standard in the previous literature—to be unreliable be- cause it produces estimates that are extremely sensitive to seemingly minor choices about control variables, sample, and weighting.
Conceptually, DG are correct in noting that omitted variables can in principle cause bias in a hedonic regression and that fixed effects can control for time-invariant idiosyncratic features of the unit of observation, in this case the county. However, it is also possible that fixed effects can increase the bias due to omitted variables if time-varying omitted variables (or data errors) are more strongly correlated with the treatment than time-invariant omitted variables that have been removed via the fixed effects. These fixed effects increase bias stemming from both endogeneity and measurement error. We have identified some important data errors and time-varying omitted variables, like storage, that are strongly correlated with both weather (the treatment variable) and DG's dependent variable, reported sales minus reported expenditures. These data errors and omitted variables bias toward zero results obtained by regressions that use sales as a proxy for production value.
Fisher et al. (2012) (hereafter, FHRS) have uncovered coding and data errors in our paper, Deschênes and Greenstone (2007) (hereafter, DG). We acknowledge and are embarrassed by these mistakes. We are grateful to FHRS for uncovering them. We hope that this Reply will also contribute to advancing the literature on the vital ques- tion of the impact of climate change on the US agricultural sector.
Friday, December 07, 2012
Thursday, December 06, 2012
Wednesday, December 05, 2012
Tuesday, December 04, 2012
Now the business association pleads to the government to postpone the raise.
The recent minimum wage raises have been indeed dramatic. Jakarta, for example, set an increase of about 45%, Bogor 60%, and Bekasi 30%.
It's the workers' right to ask for pay increase, obviously. But we should understand that there's always two sides of a transaction. While the increase in wage benefits the existing workers, it suppresses the incentive for business to employ more workers (in fact, it creates incentive to lay off some of the existing workers) - so it is bad for those who are still looking for jobs. This especially hurts the SMEs whose labor costs can add up to 25% of total production costs (compared to less than 10% in the case of bigger firms).
Yes, we are still competitive in terms of labor wage, compared to countries like China, Philippines, or Thailand. But I'm not sure if the minimum wage keeps increasing in the order like those in the past weeks. Also, it's not just a matter of wage component. Presumably other labor-related costs will increase, for example severance payment (whose formula is a function of wage level). In the end, firms might shift the burden onto the product price. And hence creates inflationary pressure.
I'm not against wage increase (as a worker myself, I love a pay increase!). But as any econ-101 book tells us, wage should be a reflection of productivity. In the case of Indonesia, however, an increase in unit labor costs of 8% has induced a decline in export growth rates of 1.6 percentage points (World Bank 2012). Which means the wage bill has increased faster than productivity. OECD (2008) also calculates that since 2002 real minimum wage in Indonesia has been hovering above labor productivity. In fact if one takes the ratio of minimum wage to median wage, Indonesia has ratio higher even compared to the OECD countries.
I don't really understand why the government has been so lenient to these demands. Once in 2006 they attempted to revise the labor law but then backed-off following a big protest. And silent since then. I thought they were still fighting hard to cut down the unemployment rate. Maybe not so seriously.