EclectEcon

SkyDome Hotel (or Whatever It Is Called These Days)

Ms Eclectic and I first stayed at SkyDome Hotel to watch a baseball game over 20 years ago when we took adjoining rooms with her parents to celebrate their wedding anniversary. We've been back several times since then and enjoyed our stays every time.

We're going to the hotel again today (Monday), this time for a two-night, two-game stay. We're taking the train there later this morning and returning home Wednesday morning. While there, we are also going up the CN Tower for lunch on Tuesday; neither of us has been up the tower. We are SO looking forward to this outing.

The Trono Blue Jays have just lost three straight games in Texas and will be hosting the division-leading Baltimore Orioles while we are there. It would be nice to see a couple of wins after that disastrous road trip. 

Sunday Night Baseball?? Five Sportsnet Channels and NO choice??

Sheesh. We received about 999 cable tv channels here in London, ON. We subscribe to LOTS of channels, and we especially like to receive every possible sports channel. 

Not one of them is carrying the Sunday night baseball game between Atlanta and Washington. 

Meanwhile several sports channels are carrying NASCAR. And Rogers Sportsnet, with five different channels because, in their words,

It's all about choices. The ability to give sports fans the freedom to choose what they want to watch, when they want to watch it. Welcome to the world of Sportsnet ONE,

is carrying the Memorial Cup (junior hockey) on ALL FIVE of their channels! I realize that most people here in London will be pleased because the London Knights are playing in that championship game. But I would like the option to switch to the baseball game now and then. Certainly Sportsnet Pacific could be offering the baseball game. What's the point of Rogers' having five different Sportsnet channels if they are NOT going to offer viewers the promised choice??

Addendum: I see their Sportsnet One channel is indeed offering some choice. It's scheduled to show cricket.

Photos from The Twiddle Plays

During our dress rehearsal, Ross Davidson took a steady stream of photos, which are spectacular. Here are just a few that I've cropped into quasi-headshots:

 

 

 

The Twiddle Plays

Upon returning to London, Ontario, I have started doing some acting. This week (Wed - Sat), I'll be appearing in The Twiddle Plays at The Arts Project (on Dundas, near Clarence Street) in London. This combination of two one-act plays is straight PG comedy, suitable for nearly everyone (other than people who take religious disagreements too seriously, maybe). The production and direction work by Heather May has turned this into a really fun opportunity. Tickets are only $15.

And in October I'll be playing Martin Dysart, the psychiatrist, in Equus. Details later.

Academic Freedom?

This past weekend I attended the annual meeting of SAFS (Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship). I'm a lifetime member of the group. This year's meeting consisted of numerous ivory-tower-type discussions of the meaning of academic freedom and how it can be preserved. To me it was a big yawn, even though I strongly believe that academic freedom, by some definition, is extremely important. 

And today I see the Trono Globe and Mail has a column about academic freedom. The G&M column makes explicit what was an underlying theme at the weekend conference: concerns about funding affect people's decisions and behaviour. As an economist, my reaction is.... "well, duh."

I love the idea of competition in the marketplace of ideas. I love the notion that better ideas will eventually conquer less-good ideas. I realize this is a long, painful, costly process, however. And I realize that universities, taxpayers, donors, parents, and students are not terribly eagre to fund the process. 

In economics, neoclassical thought gave way to the Keynesianism of the 50s and 60s, which gave way to monetarism of the 70s and 80s, which gave way to rationalized expectorations rational expectations, which has now given way to ???

Each time the prevailing orthodoxy was challenged successfully, it was because scholars have felt free to challenge it, to explore, to learn, to create, to develop. I'm grateful there is funding available to support scholars who challenge the orthodox. 

At the same time, I can assure you that if I had a cool $20m to donate to a university, I'd want to attach some strings to it. I'd want to be able to name the majority of the people who would oversee the stewardship of my donation. I would not want my money "squandered" (as it would be, in my view) on supporting a centre for the study and dissemination of, say, mathematical game theory (certainly a worthy endeavour, but not with my money, thank you). And I wouldn't want my money to be used for things that would ordinarily come out of the general budget so the funds from the general budget could be used to support such a centre. 

In my mind, academic freedom is not the same thing as open funding of whatever I want to study and teach. And once others acknowledge this distinction, we can begin to talk about what it should mean. 

Age and De-conditioning

I know better. At least intellectually/academically I know better.

I'm getting old. And I haven't maintained a state of physical fitness that I might imagine I have. 

So when I engage in physical activity, it is not unexpected that my expectations are sometimes way out of line with reality. I sometimes over-reach. A lot.

Example #1: last summer, I lifted a 150lb electric bike to put it into a storage unit. The first two lifts to get it into position were fine, but the third one involved twisting, and I wrenched my back. I'm still working on getting over that.

Example #2: As I slowly recovered from the back injury, I was unable to do as much walking as I had been used to doing, and so my weight began to creep up. Late this past winter and early this spring, I was delighted to be able to begin walking increased distances (e.g. 4-5 miles between Masonville and downtown London). A few weeks ago while doing that walk, I hoofed it along an uneven path at a "smartish pace", wrenched my knee, and was barely able to walk for a couple of weeks. Fortunately, the tendinitis seems to have eased considerably. Vitamin I* helps.

Example #3: As a result of not being able to walk much, I began swimming semi-regularly in the pool in our building. Vigourously. Of course, I overdid it, and now my shoulders are not just sore, but have minor strains.

What a doink! I'm such a slow learner.

So here's the lesson to me (and others who may need to [re]learn it):

• John, you are no longer 25 years old. You are not even as fit as you were when you were 40. 
• When you see young people engaging in physical activities and think to yourself, "I can do that", think twice: Odds are that you can't.
• Warm up slowly and considerably before doing strenuous things, especially those that you haven't done for awhile (e.g. I had a life-saving certificate nearly 50 years ago, and I just imagine/pretend I can still swim that well).
• Get your expectations and beliefs about your abilities back in line with reality.

and to all of you who see grumpy old men, there's a reason we're grumpy, and it isn't always all that funny.

*Vitamin I is our euphemism for ibuprofen.

Stimulus? Essentially no effect... ever.... except on the creation of more bureaucracy

Contrary to many standard assertions, it looks as if increased gubmnt deficits in the US have had (and would have had) any stimulus effect. It would be nice if standard Keynesian models could be dropped from intro texts and from political speeches. [h/t Gabriel]. Here's the abstract from this paper: 

This paper asks whether increases in government spending stimulate 

private activity. The first part of the paper studies private spending. 

Using a variety of identification methods and samples, I find that in 

most cases private spending falls significantly in response to an 

increase in government spending. These results imply that the 

average GDP multiplier lies below unity. In order to determine

whether concurrent increases in tax rates dampen the spending 

multiplier, I use two different methods to adjust for tax effects. 

Neither method suggests significant effects of current tax rate 

changes on the spending multiplier. In the second part of the paper, 

I explore the effects of government spending on labor markets. 

I find that increases in government spending lower unemployment. 

Most specifications and samples imply, however, that virtually all 

of the effect is through an increase in government employment, 

not private employment. I thus conclude that on balance 

government spending does not appear to stimulate private activity.