Skip to main content

January 20, 2018

From The Guardian (Jim Crace on "The book that had the greatest influence on my writing"):
Roget’s Thesaurus – but it has to be the 1955 Everyman’s edition as that’s the one my father gave me on my 10th birthday. I thought it was an inexplicable present at the time (where was my Meccano?) but it’s been at my side ever since and has given undeserved range and depth to my writing.

From The New York Times (Simon Sebag Montefiore on "Tell us about the last great book you read"):
I read many wonderful novels though I now find the idea of literary fiction obsolete. Few qualify as “great” in the sense of Tolstoy or Balzac but I just finished one that did: I was dazzled by the brilliance of “The Goldfinch,” by Donna Tartt, a masterpiece of characterization, plot, technical artistry combined with exquisite heartbreaking understanding of loss, love and art. Now that I have finished I regret its pleasures are gone, like a delicious feast — or a vanished love one will never know again.

From The New York Times (Simon Sebag Montefiore on "Which historians and biographers do you most admire?"):
Great inspirations have been classics like Antonia Fraser (“Cromwell”); Simon Schama (“Citizens”), Robert Caro (Lyndon B. Johnson); Robert K. Massie (“Peter the Great”); Hugh Thomas (“Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico”); Duff Cooper (“Talleyrand”); John Hemming (“The Conquest of the Incas”); Doris Kearns Goodwin (“Team of Rivals”); Jean Lacouture (“De Gaulle”). Most of all, I admired the late Isabel de Madariaga, the author of “Russia in the Age of Catherine the Great,” who taught me to write Russian history as I was starting my first one, “Catherine the Great & Potemkin,” which she supervised with an imperious but indulgent severity that recalled the empress herself.

From The New York Times (Simon Sebag Montefiore on "And which novelists do you especially enjoy reading?"):
The Cairo Trilogy by Naguib Mahfouz ranks up there with Tolstoy, as does “The Family Moskat,” by Isaac Bashevis Singer, and “Remembrance of Things Past,” by Proust. I adore everything by Balzac and Zola but especially “The Kill,” which has one of the most beautiful seduction scenes in literature. Everything by Joseph Roth, especially “Hotel Savoy.” From American writers: Larry McMurtry’s “Lonesome Dove” quartet; Cormac McCarthy’s “Blood Meridian”; Philip Roth’s “The Human Stain”; E. L. Doctorow’s “Billy Bathgate”; Edith Wharton’s “The Age of Innocence”; James Salter’s “All That Is”; and the early novels of Norman Mailer. Amongst modern writers I enjoy le Carré, Sarah Waters, Hilary Mantel, Don “The Cartel” Winslow, Alan Furst and Gary Shteyngart. I just finished the Irish novelist Sebastian Barry’s “Days Without End” — outstanding.

From The Journal of Politics:
This article examines the effects of natural resource extraction on authoritarian governments’ provision of public services, using subnational data from China. Facing no electoral constraint that would reflect the policy preferences of citizens, Chinese local leaders instead allocate public funds differentially based on their need for quality labor in local economic development, a critical criterion for their political success. When the local economy benefits from natural resources, the need for skilled local labor dissipates, and leaders invest less in social services that enhance labor productivity. Using panel data across all prefecture-level cities (1992–2010), I find evidence that mineral resource abundance leads local governments to provide fewer public services for education and health care. Meanwhile, services unrelated to labor quality remain unaffected. The results are robust to the inclusion of key confounding factors such as FDI inflows and state-owned enterprises’ output contributions. Additional analyses reject alternative mechanisms including political turnover.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

February 24, 2018

From The New York Times : We are willing to pay a premium for convenience, of course — more than we often realize we are willing to pay. During the late 1990s, for example, technologies of music distribution like Napster made it possible to get music online at no cost, and lots of people availed themselves of the option. But though it remains easy to get music free, no one really does it anymore. Why? Because the introduction of the iTunes store in 2003 made buying music even more convenient than illegally downloading it. Convenient beat out free. As task after task becomes easier, the growing expectation of convenience exerts a pressure on everything else to be easy or get left behind. We are spoiled by immediacy and become annoyed by tasks that remain at the old level of effort and time. When you can skip the line and buy concert tickets on your phone, waiting in line to vote in an election is irritating. This is especially true for those who have never had to wait in lines (whic...

January 30

From  University of Virginia Working Paper : This paper studies how collecting offender DNA profiles affects offenders’ later recidivism and likelihood of getting caught by exploiting a large expansion of Denmark’s DNA database. We find that DNA profiling increases detection probability and reduces recidivism within the following year by as much as 43%. We estimate the elasticity of criminal behavior with respect to the probability of detection to be -1.7, implying that a 1% higher detection probability reduces crime by almost 2%. We also find that DNA profiling changes non-criminal behavior: profiled offenders are more likely to engage in a stable relationship, and live with their children. From Iris Murdoch : Every book is the wreck of a perfect idea. From  Iris Murdoch : I think being a woman is like being Irish... Everyone says you're important and nice, but you take second place all the time. From  Iris Murdoch : Of course reading and thinking are impor...

February 26, 2018

From The Economist : An equity is a claim on the assets and the profits of a firm; a bond entitles the investor to a series of interest payments and repayment on maturity. Bitcoin brings no cashflows to the owner; the only return will come via a rise in price. When there is no obvious way of valuing an asset, it is hard to say that one target price is less likely than another. Bitcoin could be worth $10 or $100,000. One argument made by bitcoinnoisseurs is that it is a type of “digital gold”. Stores of value are supposed to keep their value; bitcoin, by contrast, is extremely volatile. Its code ensures that no more than 21m coins can ever be created; that sets bitcoin apart from fiat money, which central banks can create at will. Yet being limited in supply is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for having value; signed photographs of Economist journalists are rare but, sadly, of negligible worth. Nor is supply really limited. Plenty of other cryptocurrencies exist. If the...