Quantum Economics

Philosophical comparison of social development such as economics to quantum mechanics-related particles can be seen incidental or confusing but conceptional say humans have changed the perception of certainty and simplicity of uncertainty and complexity as well, so that the process of understanding the perception of the economy as a philosophical principle must change also has changed the way in Physics and Mathematics, because of "uncertainty" for the particle information in a "position" and "momentum" going away again in the social sciences in which the "uncertainty" of socio-economic development and the process as reported by the Government or private groups are even more unclear and subjective. The similarity of the old "certain" and "simplified" approach in which particle physics is taken as a static measure and both are used in Philosophy and Economics in which the process is simplified and made measurable or at least easily incorporated into the evaluation system, so there is no difference between the approach in Physics and Economics in terms of thinking and conventionalizing to simplify the process and what the science seems irreversible is the complex reality conventionalizing constant. More "uncertainty" should go in the same way and apply for Philosophy and Economics as well.

The similarities between science in Physics and Economics runs even beyond the growing perception of the simplicity of complexity into the reality of the realization of the "uncertainty" and "uncertainty" when in the same manner as in physics is to realize that the "particle" is in constant change there is no way to measured without error. It's not just because of lack of human technology but because of many and the reality of changing each other and even more so because the reality is very unpredictable and unknown. Same way in Philosophy and Economics can easily realize that the social economic process is not static but "uncertainty" and "uncertainty" the ever-changing socio-economic reality is not measured in any way because they think that by using some statistical measurement may give us a realistic picture of the situation economy is not realistic and not sure but even beyond the process of social and economic structures are so varied and changes that they are more like particles in quantum mechanics and then to a theoretical explanation of economic statistics or philosophical conception of evaluation principles, such as Marx or John Lodge or anyone else. Reality is constantly changing and the uncertainty that comes out of it may be only theoretically be explained by several theories and philosophical concepts but could not provide an adequate description of socio-economic realities of a changing and uncertain where the process is mainly economic in most no unpredictable and uncertain. Ideology of the few economic structures such as communism or capitalism, or socialism are conventionalized by philosophical concepts are far from explaining the socio-economic process but more likely they are to provide some "security" in reality a very diverse and unsafe; this ideological work somehow the world's political and ideological confrontation of the cold war when one is better then others, but it does not work in an open free world where philosophical concepts do not find the application or support.

To measure the statistical or however a realistic picture of the socio-economic process is uncertain and tools developed to measure these indicators are inadequate and limited, but even they are developed to perfection they still will not be able to measure this process because the process itself is uncertain and can not be measured.

The processes in the socio-economics can only be given "parameter expansion or contraction" so that they can develop in "certain areas" for certain "extend" and then modified or adjusted, it can be done by collecting energy to disperse so instead of a big wave : energy accumulated and how to create big waves are examples of Real Estate market appreciation: a positive for the economy to expand the provision of additional capital and equity that extend individual capitalization and investment but as we see in the current crisis flows expanded more positive appreciation of the process with economic impact during the appreciation has literally hit the consequences of destroying the existing economic structure; accumulation of negative energy because of respect for not spread to the entire economy so that the inevitable ripple effects, in terms of a possible way to minimize the over-appreciation is not to not allow or even limit the appreciation like all but by establishing the "parameters" which will ring a bell for over-appreciation or even better, they will automatically trigger the "prevention valve" to limit the appreciation-over or under-appreciated as well.

The difference between the economy to adjust is called capitalism or socialism where the government uses a very political tool to adjust these fluctuations, as well as of Fiscal and Monetary policy and talk about distribution and redistribution of wealth or restrict or expand business activities may not necessarily be the right tool to manage the economy "parameters" required for "over expansion" or "under the expansion" does not occur.

The "Iquanta" quanta, but this is not a part of particles or energy, or something else in the physical aspect but the quantity is measured philosophical "energy" or just a "word" that can be considered as an abstraction or "imaginary particle" also, it will depend on the point of view: while some may believe that the processes of socio-economics has its own energy or not, for me as believers do not have any meaning because the most important thing is going is to set the parameters; The same principle would apply to "plasma Iglued" and several others terminology taken from Quantum Mechanics that would be used in this study.

This study tried to challenge the status quo of Philosophy and Economics ideologically motivated by the uncertainty principle from the economic development process, to show that there are similarities between Physics and Quantum Mechanics Iquantum Economics Socio-Economic Philosophy, to set some "parameters" socio-economic processes in could eventually be used in practical economy to restrict "big wave" of economic recession or at least explain the "parameters."

To show that even by nature unpredictable and impossible to put into a philosophical structure that can explain all socio-economic processes, although there are several parameters that can limit the occurrence of big waves and does little to indicate that the economic downturn and the recession did not even control is not a part or tool somehow "free market development", but the adjustment is the result of occasional violence to build energy to a large wave and in the same time some of this energy can be incorporated into the parameter / diversified so as to prevent large waves from such a frequent or more violent.

Is iquanta it? - It's not part of the particle was probably part of the energy or part of the conceptional particles to explain certain philosophical concepts which particles move, contract and expand in a limited predictability. This is influenced by socio-economic processes and development. That accumulation of energy is largely based on socio-economic events and fluctuations.

What igloued plasma - power that connects iquantas and other parts of the constantly changing and moving events and processes in the socio-economic process, we can imagine this terminology as a mirror of socio-economic processes so that they can be found? change them and explain their changes, vibration, energy accumulation and make adjustments to the socio-economic violence. Physical quantity constructed by iquantas and other parts of the rapidly changing and moving, where the plasma igloued connecting this section and give them the meaning of events, the "energy" building with an acceleration iquantas and other parts of the current economic and development into a big wave of violence: similar to monster waves in the ocean. Well, like establish common quality is the concentration of wave energy between neighbors, but this observation is not the principle. In the real development of the economy are several factors that influence positively toward the expansion and progress within a certain time and the same factors may have a negative effect in a different time or mostly when passing through a positive level construct: (eg appreciation of real estate containing a positive effect on economic development as far as when market prices are not supported by income area ratio, or until withdrawn and reinvested capital gains do not carry the flow of support; cheerful or to be compared with other business activities or if it etc). many different conditions so if a particular wave energy related physical quantities of real estate is built that may encourage a big wave and these waves may also rocked many other parts of the real economy.

Thus came the difference between quantum mechanics and economics iquantum: uncertainty regarding the supervision of iphysical not only the ever-changing reality but also the way of observation in quantum mechanics when the main problem is to measure and observe in iquantum economy is putting the parameters after analyzing the information when the difference between the amount iphysical and observations larger then the final vector can be started from the same or even totally opposite points, so the relevance between and among these vectors based on their direction, length and angle of their projection.

Economics Is Not Just About Money

There is a general public misconception that the economy is about money and finance. This is simply not true. Although there are certainly elements present in the Study of Monetary Economics, Economic discipline is about the best use of resources of all kinds, whether they be land, labor, capital, time, technology, equipment, natural resources, or whatever. Supply and demand conditions are familiar to us all.

Economics is a logical discipline that attempts to both identify the problem or the current state of affairs, and sometimes even cure them. While discipline is considered as non-exact science for about two centuries, the advent of modern technology and computer models & basic historical information has now been significantly enhance the ability of economists to estimate how many variables can and will affect business, industry, government, and everyday citizens and organizations.

Only a few people who understand that Economics and Economic Studies include labor, time, and the use of far more than money. (Although the basic money and banking is an economic concept, the use of micro-finance is about money, not economics.) If a plant manager or supervisor of the warehouse is to decide how many workers are needed, and what to do, this is Labor Economics.

The decision how much product to produce and what price must be sold to maximize profits is Business Economics. Economics also job creation, such as business investment, government spending, export & import (trade) and consumer consumption. Once again, supply and demand issues. Often what we call "management" really Economy.

In most cases, the economy is efficiency. Idea of Economic Studies is to use their best resources may be used, or optimized. Thus, the boundaries of discipline in some form of engineering; Managerial Economics course not. Economists and managers using the Economy has many tools at their disposal for accuracy. This includes calculus, computers, databases, models, advanced mathematics, theory, graphs, charts, tables, and basic supply and demand functions. This is quite an arsenal!

Next time you hear the word "Economy," remember that it's not just about cash, or finance. Money is a small part of the subject. Think about the allocation of resources. Think efficiency. Then you will think like an economist!

Spain: how to mess with the labor market

Spain has long been a puzzle because of its abnormally high employment rate, in particular among the young. But things seem to have rectified themselves somewhat since Spain got more integrated into the European market, which unemployment rates comparable to France. But the last recession turned out to be a disaster, with the unemployment rate increasing by 11% points, compared to 2% points in France. What is wrong with Spain? For one, there was a spectacular drop in activity in th construction sector, which initially accounted for a sixth of GDP and was basically divided by six.

Samuel Bentolila, Pierre Cahuc, Juan Dolado and Thomas Le Barbanchon claim that there is also a serious issue with labor market institutions. While both France and Spain have extensive employment protection legislation, and severance pay is formally higher in France, Spain requires, for example, administrative approval for collective dismissals of over 10% of the workforce. Such approval can only be obtained by collective bargaining and much higher severance pay. While severance pay is usually not problematic (it is accounted for in wages), it is the red-tape associated with this and the hoops firms that firms need to go through to dismiss that become economically relevant, because these are transfers that captured by a third party: administration. This makes it then very costly to hire someone, given expected firing costs, and especially so in uncertain times.

Using a search and matching model, Bentolila, Cahuc, Dolado and Le Barbanchon find that the unemployment gap between France and Spain would have been reduced by 45% had Spain adopted French labor market institutions. And I surmise it would be much more with other laws, as France has quite high employment protection in international comparison. No wonder that Spain recently scrapped much of its employment protection regulation in the midst of a deep recession, which may sound counter-intuitive at first. But if you want firms to hire in a recession, they should not have to commit for long-term employment.

Towards better growth accounting

There are some literatures that I find very frustrating, and the empirical growth literature is among them. The initial idea to take a production function to see the contribution of labor and capital to the average growth rate of an economy and then also to compare this way differences in income levels was initially very instructive, in particular because it highlighted how total factor productivity was important. It went all downhill from there, as people started wildly regressing whatever they could get their hands on across countries, mostly with poor data. TFP can be influenced by many things, and there is no way one can identify anything without applying some structure, even with good data.

Gino Gancia, Andreas Müller and Fabrizio Zilibotti use a model to distinguish the contributions of factors (labor, human capital and physical capital), barriers to technology adoptions and technology inadequate for local conditions. The results are interesting, too. Removing these barriers would increase per capita income by 24% in the OECD and 36% elsewhere. And given that a model was estimated, it can be used for various scenario analyses. For example, they find that globalization increases skill premia and thus world income disparities, but this can be reversed by coupling trade liberalization with a reinforcement of intellectual property rights. These latter results are somewhat counterintuitive, but are justified by the fact that with stronger IP rights, there can be a transfer of technology to the South.

Should food prices influence monetary policy?

Central banks care about inflation, but not about the inflation people care about. Because energy prices are volatile, they are not included in the price index a central bank typically looks at, because including it would made the indicator less informative. At they also include food prices, because those fluctuate a lot as well, in particular because of seasons. That can make sense for a rich country, where food represents only a small portion of the budget. For poorer countries, excluding food is more controversial.

Luis Catão and Roberto Chang note that world food prices seem to cause worldwide inflation, and this should have implications for inflation in small open economies that take food prices as given. The question is then whether central banks should react to such terms of trade shocks. For a net food importer, Catão and Chang find that including food in the price index relevant to the central bank is welfare enhancing. The reason is that if food has a larger weight domestically than in the rest of the world, the real exchange rate and the terms of trade can move in opposite directions following a food price shocks. The welfare improvement comes from a change in the correlations in aggregates leading to smoother consumption, but it possibly results in higher inflation and higher volatility of output and employment. It is thus not obvious including food prices would then be an easy sell.

Do professional sports teams belong on the stock market?

Professional sports clubs exist to win, but this often requires money. Different models have developed in this regard. The US model is private ownership of clubs within a cartel, where private ownership is meant to be a single person, or a small group of people. The European model is broad membership with few benefactors who do not own the club, and clubs operate within an open league system (promotion and relegation based mostly on sport results). But over the last two decades a good number of European clubs went public and are now listed on stock markets. This highlights a change of priorities, profits over sport results, although the two are clearly correlated. But how well do these clubs fare?

Michel Aglietta, Wladimir Andreff and Bastien Drut note that the performance of sports stock is rather weak, and thus has not attracted institutional investors as was probably hoped for. This weak performance is not that surprising, I suppose many hold such stock to frame it above the TV set. It may also be due, as the authors argue, to the fact that sports clubs have poor governance. So, maybe the next step is to run them like a business where the objective is to maximize shareholder value, and make sport results only a means to generate these profits.

Journal editors are poor selectors of best papers

Journal editors are thought to be exceptional scholars who are capable of identifying the best papers and in particular those that will have the largest impact, typically measured by citation counts. But editors have considerable help: first peer reviewers make reports that should be informative, second authors to some extend self-select in the submission process, they would not send a paper where it has no chance of getting published. But it is difficult to evaluate whether an editor is doing a good job. However, when editors choose to put as lead paper the one they consider the best in the issue, one can in retrospect check whether these papers are cited the most. As I reported earlier, editors turn out not to be particularly good.

What about those papers that get the "best article of the year" award? Tom Coupé does a similar exercise and finds that they are more cited than the median article, and slightly more than the runner-up articles, but they are rarely the most cited in a year. You just cannot trust editors, even though they are even supported by a committee for such awards.