Joe Fish

The thing with public housing renovation discourse is that — even ignoring the many opportunistic NIMBYs— the following are true: 1. Renovations need to happen 2. There are understandable tenant concerns around right to return 3. Renovations still need to happen 4. If not zohran than who?

new follow-up to the "supply constraints dont explain house price growth" paper that's been bopping around for a few years. in this version, they do explain housing price and quantity growth! haven't read so can't vouch. @michaelwiebe.bsky.social have you gone through this one?

obligatory friends don't let friends use Numbeo. Here's what's happening: 1. most of numbeo's "quality of life" index is prices. it has each of purchasing power, cost of living, and price:home ratios 2. the graphic says it drops these. what's left is healthcare, pollution, commutes, and climate

needless to say this is a bad index. LA and NYC rank bad either because the author didn't drop all the price data or because they have bad commutes and bad air quality (and bad healthcare?) which is true, but also misses all the things that makes LA and NYC great

i think these net worth breakdowns are kind of dumb tbh. there's two questions here for the under 35 group: 1. why did wealth skyrocket from 2019-2022? (not shown by WSJ) 2. why did wealth decline from 2022-2025 turns out it's a mix of changes in homeownership, used car prices, and house prices

so the, imo correct, read is that the cohort under 35 in 2022 -- people from like idk ages 32-35 in 2022 -- got super lucky with rates and home prices. less than "wealth collapsed for young people". eg if you draw a straight line from 2019-> 2025 stuff looks pretty good

i think these net worth breakdowns are kind of dumb tbh. there's two questions here for the under 35 group: 1. why did wealth skyrocket from 2019-2022? (not shown by WSJ) 2. why did wealth decline from 2022-2025 turns out it's a mix of changes in homeownership, used car prices, and house prices

Are people really going to bat for cosmetology programs? Aren’t those mostly like: 80% Private companies of dubious value 20% Community and technical colleges and some state schools

Even the industry publications don’t really go to bat for them: “They graduate at higher rates and with less debt” (note nothing about earnings) And “there are some schools that need reform” And “our students make more than the min wage and general labors”

the thing with luxury condos is that they're mostly a myth. 1. within the same county, condos sell for 35% less than single family homes 2. within the same neighborhood, they sell for 43% less 3. within the same neighborhood and adjusting for some quality characteristics, they sell for 21% less

what's the full policy slate on this? tax the phone calls, tax the texts, tax the job applications, tax the parking spots, tax the car size, tax the swimming pools in the summer, tax the roads, tax the swipes on dating apps. any i miss?

the whole NYC transplants discourse is so dumb. for one, new york city -- famously a city of transplants! for two, if you're asking "how many people who live in NYC were born in the US and not in New York State" it's like 14%.

if you look at US-born New Yorkers and ask where they're from, surprise, surprise the answer is: 1. New York State (77%) 2. Near New York City (8%) 3. Everywhere else (15%)

reviewing ALICE, one of the many, many "alternative cost of living indices". a few thoughts: 1. the index is a lil goofy. clothing is not considered an essential, for instance. 2. no quality adjustment anywhere. not necessarily wrong but does matter 3. CPI is way more transparent methodology wise

my general takeaway with all these alternative cost of living indices is that the BLS should get a bigger budget and produce these internally. i think they have a much better institutional knowledge on how to do this sort of thing and dont have the incentive to produce "inflation is wrong" reports

reviewing ALICE, one of the many, many "alternative cost of living indices". a few thoughts: 1. the index is a lil goofy. clothing is not considered an essential, for instance. 2. no quality adjustment anywhere. not necessarily wrong but does matter 3. CPI is way more transparent methodology wise

carrying on, some good things of the index (and of the MIT living wage calculator which is very similar and i think done a bit better). 1. it's very easy to look across space -- probably more so than the CPI 2. it's easier to look across household structure (provided you believe the reweights)

reviewing ALICE, one of the many, many "alternative cost of living indices". a few thoughts: 1. the index is a lil goofy. clothing is not considered an essential, for instance. 2. no quality adjustment anywhere. not necessarily wrong but does matter 3. CPI is way more transparent methodology wise

clothing is an obvious omission in the index. it's an example of something whose price has been driven so far down that we dont even really conceive of it like an essential even though it is.

reviewing ALICE, one of the many, many "alternative cost of living indices". a few thoughts: 1. the index is a lil goofy. clothing is not considered an essential, for instance. 2. no quality adjustment anywhere. not necessarily wrong but does matter 3. CPI is way more transparent methodology wise

“Expected deflation is super bad” is a bit not really true in most macro models right? Like it’s only really a zero lower bound issue? Unexpected deflation sure but if it’s expected most macro models should say it doesn’t matter — I don’t think any have a Keynesian deflationary spiral mechanism

Paper seems cool but those event studies look weird. Employment outcomes for the high exposure groups jump up right around 2021, so the effect seems very sensitive to the reference period. Eg, another interpretation is this is a plot of tech hiring in 2021 and slowdown post interest rate hikes

not for nothing but i think people are dunking on this too hard. the underlying econ is all done by people who are considered very respected and some of the foremost experts on this kind of stuff. whether it ends up being correct, idk, but i can assure people they've thought about your objections

none of this is to say that their views are *consensus*. i dont think they are, and you can find lots of dissenting economists. for instance, ben moll is generally pretty skeptical of explosive growth. benjaminmoll.com/wp-content/u...