This year’s conference certainly *looked* different: No hotel-room interviews! Office hours with the ombudsperson! Even lines for the ladies room.
Whether that translates into deeper, more lasting change remains to be seen.
And on one level, this has been the easy part. It’s one thing to pass a code of conduct; it’s another to enforce it. It’s one thing to agree diversity matters; it’s another to hold departments accountable for their progress.
Some bits of news on that front, from our interview with Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen:
- One formal complaint has been filed, and will be taken up by the AEA Executive Committee as soon as it finalizes procedures for doing so (which should be very soon);
- Bernanke, unprompted, raises the possibility of grading departments on their diversity efforts. Although he said for the time being they will focus on encouraging transparency and spreading best practices.
- Bernanke also, in response to a question from @jimtankersley, expressed some openness to the idea of quotas to ensure diversity of editors at top journals.
Some other observations from #ASSA2020: There was a clear sense of progress, including from activists and other who have pushed for faster change. Quite a lot of people giving credit to Bernanke (and Yellen) for pushing the very slow-moving AEA to do more, faster.
At the same time, I heard lots of concern about backsliding. Lots of stories from long-time activists about previous eras when it seemed like things were changing, only to see progress stall.
Discussions of race and racism were much more prominent this year after being decidedly secondary to gender last year.
Lots of historical perspective tied to #NEAat50 (and some frustration that AEA leadership isn’t acknowledging/drawing on that experience).
I also heard a lot of talk (esp. from younger economists) about elitism and how the focus on top departments/journals affects econ in its culture, diversity and research.
That conversation does not seem to have permeated the leadership the way the race/gender convo has.
And as always, thank you to the many, many people who talked to us on and off the record about the state of the profession, it’s problems and the path forward.
Have more to say? My DMs are open; anonymity guaranteed.
Another thing to mention was the focus on solutions at this year’s conference, as opposed to just highlighting problems. There was a well-attended session on “best practices” with practical steps for improving teaching, mentorship, recruiting, etc. Came up in other sessions too.
As Janet Yellen said to kick off Friday’s session on solving econ’s race problem: “Let me emphasize that our focus is not on *whether* there is a race problem in economics. That’s been abundantly documented.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So this was an interesting finding from @NateSilver538, but one I found odd because @BLS_gov publishes CPI for regions (and for some metro areas) but not for states. So I dug into it a bit, and there's less here than meets the eye.
Nate's data is coming from this tracker from the @JECRepublicans. They don't have a state-level inflation estimate either, though. They just use BLS's estimate of regional inflation and apply it to an estimate of household spending when Biden took office. jec.senate.gov/public/index.c…
You can see this if you hover over their map (or download their data). States in the same region all have the same cumulative rates of inflation. But they differ in the amount of inflation experienced in dollar terms because some states have higher avg household incomes.
I hate that @ellawinthrop is leaving us, but I'm so glad I got to work with her on her last piece for @nytimesbusiness. She's the best, most collaborative, most creative visual journalist I've ever worked with. A thread with a few of my favorite Ben-and-Ella collabs:
Good news on inflation! U.S. consumer prices FELL 0.1 percent in June, and were up just 3 percent from a year earlier. "Core" prices, stripping out volatile food and fuel, were up 0.1 percent from May and 3.3 percent from last June. Data: …Live coverage: bls.gov/news.release/c… nytimes.com/live/2024/07/1…
This is the second straight month where there has been effectively no inflation on a month-to-month basis. Prices were flat in May, and down in June.
If you take a longer view here: At 3% year-over-year, inflation is no longer outside historical norms (though it is still higher than immediately prepandemic). And over the past three months, rents have risen at an annual rate of ***just 1.1%.***
Job openings ticked up in May (but only because April was revised down). Layoffs edged up. Quits basically flat. All consistent with a gradually slowing, but not collapsing, job market. #JOLTS
Full data: bls.gov/news.release/j…
There were 8.1 million job openings on the last day of May. That's up from 7.9 million in April, revised down from the 8.1m originally reported.
Larger story here is that openings are clearly falling quickly, even if they're still high in absolute terms. #JOLTS
There were 1.2 job openings for every unemployed worker in May. That's more or less where things stood immediately before the pandemic (when the labor market was widely viewed as strong but not overheated).
The U.S. economy slowed in the final three months of the year, but only because the Q3 number was so strong -- the 3.3% growth rate in Q4 was well above expectations and certainly offered no hints of a brewing recession. (Belated charts thread)
This is not a case where the volatile components of G.D.P. made a weak quarter look strong, as sometimes happens. Measures of underlying demand were also very strong.
For all the predictions of a recession, G.D.P. growth actually *accelerated* in 2023, and topped the prepandemic average growth rate as well.
Job openings, quits and layoffs all edged down slightly in November. Consistent with a gradually cooling labor market, but definitely no sign things are falling off a cliff. #JOLTS
Data: bls.gov/news.release/j…
There were 8.8 million job openings on the last day of November. That's down a touch from October, but only because October was revised up. Big picture: Openings are trending down (and quite quickly, at that), but are still high by historical standards. #JOLTS
The number of job openings per unemployed worker actually ticked up in November (because unemployment fell), but ignore the noise. The labor market is becoming more balanced, though the ratio is (again) high relative to the prepandemic period.