Top 10 Songs That Will Make You Cry

Advertisements

Are batting collapses becoming so common in test cricket?

Mostly Economics

Superb analytical piece via Tom Eaton (HT Gulzar). There is one argument one keeps having with younger followers in cricket. We argue that batting collapses are becoming way too common and one does not anymore see fights from batters. The younger lot does not agree and says test cricket is becoming more result oriented. As a result we are seeing both sides going for wins/losses than mere draws. We argue saying it is more due to lack of skill/application which is leading to lack of well fought draws and rise in one sided results. And the debate goes on.

Eaton points to statistics showing batting collapses have indeed risen. Also test scores are rising:

Confused, I went to the record books, where I discovered three peculiar facts.

The first was that I wasn’t wrong about batting pile-ons. Test teams are scoring huge totals much more often than they used to…

View original post 816 more words

Explaining the Party Shift

Against Jebel al-Lawz

Preface

One of the greatest ironies of American politics is how Woodrow Wilson (Democratic presidential nominee from New Jersey) in 1916 and George W. Bush (Republican presidential nominee from Texas) in 2000 ended up winning pretty much the same states:


Of the states that went for Gore (Democratic presidential nominee from Tennessee; Bill Clinton’s Vice-President) in 2000, only Washington, New Mexico, California, and Maryland went for Wilson in 1916 (New Mexico due to Mexicanization; the others were swing states in 1916). Of the states that went for Bush in 2000, only Indiana, South Dakota, and West Virginia went for Hughes (Wilson’s 1916 opponent; Republican from New York) in 1916 (and most of the area of West Virginia went for Wilson in 1916):

Sorry, no cartogram for 2000, strangely…

View original post 12,268 more words

The Ascent of the Second World: U.S. South Edition

Against Jebel al-Lawz

See my post The Ascent of the Second World for international examples. In 1929, the U.S. South (as well as North Dakota and surrounding states) was very relatively poor, while the U.S. North (especially New York and Illinois) was very relatively rich. The four richest states in the country were New York, Illinois, Delaware, and California, with the exception of Delaware, all home to the largest cities of America. Today, things are very different. Due to greater mobility of labor and capital and institutional convergence of the U.S. South and North (at least partly due to Federal legislation), the U.S. is a much more regionally equal country than it was in 1929, or even 1979. As I discussed in the Ascent of the Second World post, Puerto Rico is also much closer to U.S. income levels than it was in 1950.

Lighter states are richer. In 1929, regional inequality in…

View original post 87 more words

Lessons from 2017 Clark economics prize: Encourage more studies on Indian railways and economic history..

Mostly Economics

Niranjan Rajyadhaksha of Mint has this piece on the 2017 Clark prize given to Donald Daveson of Stanford.

One of Daveson papers is othe controversial topic: Development history of Indian railways. Those for railways say it connected India mainlands to hinterlands enabling development. Those against say railways was another source of colonial exploitation (perhaps the most successful one) where rich resources from hinterlands were brought first to ports and then shipped to London.

Daveson looks at historical data and falls in the first camp:

View original post 652 more words

Pielke on Climate #1

The Climate Fix

climate_street_art_1I’ve decided to publish an occasional newsletter on climate and energy issues. It is not part of my day-to-day research or writing, which is focused on sports governance and science policy.  I’ve written a fair bit on the topics of climate and energy, including twobooks, and I may not have anything new or interesting to say. That’s OK, it’s just a blog.

A few things to say up front:

  • If you don’t like what I write or don’t like me, then don’t read it. It’s OK, I don’t mind.
  • If you do appreciate the perspective, consider the tip jar to your right.
  • If you’d like to engage, consider a comment, a Tweet or an email. I am happy to discuss or debate.
  • If you choose to call me names or lie about me, oh so common in discussing climate, then you will be blocked or ignored.
  • We’ll…

View original post 1,304 more words