How would that happen? Well, the authors argue it should be expected in any organization where the following two conditions hold:

1. The best member are rewarded with promotions
2. Competence in a new position is not highly correlated with competence at a prior level

The authors simulated the preceding in a pyramidal organizational form using a mathematical agent model. Here is the outcome:

Here we show, by means of agent based simulations, that if the [above two conditions] actually hold in a given model of an organization with a hierarchical structure, then not only the "Peter principle" is unavoidable, but it yields in turn a significant reduction of the global efficiency of the organization. [Emphasis mine]

Granted, this shouldn't be surprising news, one would think, to anyone who has spent any time around large organizations. A disproportionate number of the positions always seem filled by people who elicit a WTF? reaction from reasonable-minded observers.

So, do we just live with it? After all, we can hardly get around elevating the best people, and it isn't unreasonable to think that one's experience in a former position doesn't adequately prepare for the new one.

Not necessarily, according to the authors:

...the best strategies to improve, or at least not to diminish, the efficiency of an organization, when one ignores the actual way of competence transmission, are those of promoting an agent at random or of randomly alternating the promotion of the best and the worst members. We think that these results could be useful to guide the management of large real hierarchical systems of different nature and in different fields.

Whoa, it turns out calling someone's promotion "random" is a compliment. Who knew darts could be so handy at promotion time?

Source:

The Peter Principle Revisited: A Computational Study
Authors: Alessandro Pluchino, Andrea Rapisarda, Cesare Garofalo

For their part, of course, oil companies think that the Iraqi oil auctioneers are nuts. The proffered risk/reward premium for exploration, development and production in an unsafe country with minimal infrastructure and maximal political flux was near zero. But in their zealotry to demonstrate resource nationalism to an uneasy electorate, Iraqi officials scared off most sane bidders, making the only successful buyer in this first round a bid backstopped and subsidized by the Chinese government -- and one that still required a huge price concession.

Here is a nice summary snippet from IHS on where this means the sorry process goes from here:

Without Iraq offering a better risk/reward ratio to investors it will have to undertake all investment and development itself—a process that will be slow, laborious, and under-funded, and will result in volumes nowhere near those targeted and years from their hoped-for schedule.

Iraq needs to look not only at the reward side of its offering, however; it can make significant progress on lowering the investor risks. The government needs to direct its attention to passing a national hydrocarbons law in order to lay down a clear legal framework for the deals and give them greater political legitimacy than what is just—effectively—a mere pledge of contract allegiance from the currently serving ministers. This would also lower the political risk in Iraq, as the law in itself would require some form of broader political understanding between the leading factions and thereby to some extent bind much of Iraq's political forces into taking responsibility for long-term hydrocarbon policy.

More here and here.

So, one way of framing the problem is to think of your "entire population" as a sample from a larger population, potentially including future cases.

Precisely right, and a point that many naive hypothesis-generators might keep in mind, whether in financial markets or elsewhere.

More here.

Wells Fargo & Company (NYSE:WFC) said today it will accept registered warrants issued by the State of California from its retail and business customers for a limited time. It will begin accepting the registered warrants for deposit on July 2, 2009 and stop accepting them no later than July 10, 2009.

“We’re very disappointed, as are many Californians, that California has taken the unfortunate step of issuing IOUs in lieu of its payments to some businesses and individuals,” said Lisa Stevens, head of Community Banking for Wells Fargo in California. “Wells Fargo has a long history of taking extraordinary measures to help our customers and will accept registered warrants from our customers, but only for a limited time, to allow them time to make other arrangements. We are reluctant to take this step, but are doing so to help our customers who are not at fault and with the expectation that the Legislature and Governor will complete the budget within days. We join all Californians in urging our Legislature and our Governor to take the appropriate steps as soon as possible to resolve this budget crisis.”

[Emphasis mine]

It is deliriously ironic and surreal that it took California to make screwed-up and irresponsible banks look like mature adults.

• Thing again about Asia’s inevitable rise (Source)
• The end of finance is the end of macho (Source)
• The 2009 Failed States Index (Source)
• The collapse of the Baltic states (Source
• Why birth rates matter (Source)

A cynic (or an entrepreneur) would like say the answer is obvious. Venture capitalists are meddlesome sorts who get in the way of running a company, so startups will do best to the extent that they can keep VCs a few timezones and/or flights away.

For some reason the paper’s author don’t proffer the above explanation. Instead, they argue it is a combination of higher hurdle rate forcing VCs into making better investments, plus some geographic arbitrage. While both are possible, even if geographic arbitrage in venture is mostly a loser strategy, I’d also bet there is a reputational effect going on. In short, the “smart money” from out of town gets to do deals in the hinterlands at better valuations than does a local fund.

Source:

Buy Local?  The Geography of Successful and Unsuccessful Venture Capital Expansion
Henry Chen*, Paul Gompers**, Anna Kovner***, and Josh Lerner**

As an aside, by my calculations U.S. carbon emissions declined last year roughly on par with the entire annual emissions of Spain. Maybe we should make that the new unit of measure: We’re going for a Spain in emission reductions.

The answer is capitalism’s dirty little secret: excessive lending was the only way to maintain the living standards of the vast bulk of the population at a time when wealth was being concentrated in the hands of an elite.

The amount by which the elite has benefited is startling, and illustrates the problem with lightly regulated free markets: the rich get much richer while the rest do not get richer at all. According to Société Générale economists, the inflation-adjusted income of the highest-paid fifth of US earners has risen by 60 per cent since 1970, while it has fallen by more than 10 per cent for the rest. As was recently pointed out in the New York Review of Books, the Walton family, of Wal-Mart fame, is wealthier than the bottom third of the US population put together – about 100m people. These are staggering statistics, confirmed by measures such as the US and UK’s ever-rising Gini coefficients, which estimate income disparity. Another way of putting this is that the share of profits in gross domestic product is at a 100-year high, or was until very recently.

The preceding is such an important point. We became indebted, in large part, because of a structural imbalance in society, one that skewed incomes, redirected wealth, and encouraged companies and individuals to lever up instead of seeking out and earning higher incomes. At the same time, our unwillingness to say no to great society programs, without raising taxes to pay for them, meant that we became beholden to the bond market for funding ongoing operations, this creating an elevated base of required income to service our rising debt.

The solution is messy, multi-part and painful, but he closes on two notes with which I agree strongly:

…we should all come to terms with the fact that these are structural issues needing structural solutions; they need to be enforced over a longer time period than any one government’s term. So we need a new political consensus, one aimed at reducing overall debt levels while reducing inequality by encouraging education, entrepreneurship and investment in innovation.

Read the whole thing here.

More here.

On Greg Mankiw and Ben Bernanke

The 1980s trained macroeconomics -- like Greg Mankiw and Ben Bernanke and so forth -- became a very complacent group, very ill adapted to meet with a completely unpredictable and new situation, such as we've had.

On Robert Lucas and his acolytes

Those guys were useless at Federal Reserve meetings.

On Alan Greenspan

But the trouble is that he had been an Ayn Rander. You can take the boy out of the cult but you can't take the cult out of the boy.

On Milton Friedman

He was a libertarian to the point of nuttiness.

Ob bubbles

And I'm not sure most of the people that get caught up in the middle of a bubble can be described as irrational. It seems pretty rational to buy a house and flip it in the next few weeks at a profit when that's been happening for along time. It works both ways.

On the dollar

I think it's almost inevitable that, with a billion people in China wide awake for the first time, and a billion people in India, there's going to be some kind of a terrible run against the dollar. And I doubt it can stay orderly, because all of our own hedge funds will be right in the vanguard of the operation.

Q: Very last thing. What would you say to someone starting graduate study in economics? Where do you think the big developments in modern macro are going to be, or in the micro foundations of modern macro? Where does it go from here and how does the current crisis change it?

A: Well, I’d say, and this is probably a change from what I would have said when I was younger: Have a very healthy respect for the study of economic history, because that’s the raw material out of which any of your conjectures or testings will come. And I think the recent period has illustrated that.

More here.