Great Reads: Leadership Links

. August 13, 2011
  • Agregar a Technorati
  • Agregar a
  • Agregar a DiggIt!
  • Agregar a Yahoo!
  • Agregar a Google
  • Agregar a Meneame
  • Agregar a Furl
  • Agregar a Reddit
  • Agregar a Magnolia
  • Agregar a Blinklist
  • Agregar a Blogmarks


Strong leadership makes enemies. Deal with it. (Reformed Broker)

Are you giving up a relationship with your audience? (Seth Godin)

Wasting time poorly is not wasting time productively. Get it? (Seth Godin)

16 harsh truths that make us stronger. (Chess 'n Wine)

Trading and Investing 

Economists tend to be late in forecasting recessions. (Reformed Broker)

The world economy is overleveraged: too much debt. (Aleph Blog)

High volatility is associated with bear market bottoms. (Aleph Blog)

Affordable Living

Use PriceLine to save money when you travel. (CNN)

Marriage and Family

This is the next step away from the traditional family. (Boundless Line)

Thoughts from a new husband. (Boundless Line)


Averages don't always tell you what's really important. (xkcd)

Beautiful people are lonely. (Softer World)

Arsenic or aspirin? (This Is Indexed)

This is Indexed on unrealistic goals:


Norman said...

"The world economy is overleveraged: too much debt." I don't think I get Aleph blog. Debt is one of those things that has some funny properties at the aggregate level; namely, that the net level of debt (total borrowed - total lent) in the world economy is always zero. By definition, the world economy can't be overleveraged.

The blog seems to be talking a bit along the lines that total activity in the credit market (total borrowed + total lent), which was a pretty common argument around the timing of WWI and one of the things that prevented a resurgence of world finance and globalization until the 1970s. I'm not saying it's wrong--there may be a strong case for a 'goldilocks' level of aggregate finance--but the author doesn't seem to want to go that direction, instead focusing on the imprudence of the debtors (as if China is the main creditor in this situation). You could also make a wealth distribution argument, but he doesn't really go that direction either.

The author seems to completely miss the Keynesian arguments about (1) shifting debt burdens from some constituents to others, and (2) using government credit to smooth debt burdens and consumption across time. Again, you could make the argument that in most countries this isn't what's happening in practice, but he doesn't even seem to notice that this is a logical possibility. Usually this kind of thinking is due to an inability to think in disaggregated terms, but I don't know if that's true of Merkel.

Also, the sentence "In general, the more of the economy that we hand off to the government, economic growth will be less" is pretty controversial. I know a thing or two about economic growth, and the evidence regarding government size hurting growth is tentative at best. Again, there's some evidence for a 'goldilocks' condition here, but the data doesn't give a robust answer one way or the other.

I guess I really don't see what the author is trying to do here.