FeedBurner makes it easy to receive content updates in My Yahoo!, Newsgator, Bloglines, and other news readers.
Given a very basic, but I think plausible and highly intuitive framework this result leans entirely on performance review. Indeed, the excerpt from the book shows why.
If you control for occupation (here we can think of that as role, location, level and perhaps tenure) and you see no effect then what you are missing is that a high paying occupation is the “reward” for being male.
But, if it’s just a reward for being male, rather than being fully qualified (where fully qualified is defined as what a woman would need to get the same occupation) then men should perform worse than woman.
Yet, when we control for measured performance we get no wage differential. What this is saying is that measured performance (relative to actual performance) is biased upward for men.
Interestingly, I don’t think this has to imply that the performance reviewer is biased towards men. It could simply be that reviewers dislike giving bad scores. Because bad performance (relative to the occupational cohort) is more likely to be male, male scores are biased up.
A result of this very basic model is that reviewing on a curve (and thus forcing someone to get a bad score) could lessen gender discrimination.
I’ve not gone through the Florida details, but many EVs (including Tesla) have more potential battery capacity than advertised because of charging issues. It’s hard to charge the last little bit of a Li-ion battery, for a variety of reasons, and not good to drain completely. The “official” capacity takes such issues into account. In extremis you can drain more than normal, at some cost to battery life. So I wonder whether Tesla will reverse the capacity boost.
Does price discrimination have any relation to R&D incentives? Any model or real world research i could peruse?
adding on to your example…
if the company is able to sell more product due to price discrimination, then, all other things being equal, it will feel less of a need to reduce production costs (via R&D or other means) to stay profitable.
If there more detailed models that account for how the benefits of price discrimination are spread, I’d love to learn about it. It often seems that price discrimination benefits the shareholder and not the consumer. Sometimes it seems i confuse price discrimination with rent seeking behavior. I know they are not mutually exclusive, but I don’t know a quick way to mentally run and compare both models in my head. … any ideas?
Another way for me to state my concern. In the real world or in a model, how can I figure out how the benefits of price discrimination are handed out? “real world” seems hard to figure out b/c once money goes into an account any analysis of where the money went can be fooled by varying accounting practices.
Interestingly, originally Tesla put different sized batteries in the cars. However, I think the demand for the 60kWh battery wasn’t high enough to justify the extra production hassles of the option. So, instead of revoking the option altogether, they moved to software limiting the larger battery.
You are overthinking. This is not a quick response to the news, but rather evergreen Onion satire of our wandering attention. For the past two years we were subject to continual political posturing about the “disappearance of the middle class.” For the Left it was a call to arms to stop tax cuts for the rich and to talk about UBI. For the Right it was a call to arms to kill the Obama-era “job killing regulation” of the financial industry and “open borders.” Now that other “news” is driving our attention, it has been many months since CCN or Fox or MSNBC has featured anyone’s blathering about the “disappearance of the middle class,” hence the satire. Nothing has changed in reality (except for the expert “conversation”).