 |
|
|
|||||
Republican-leaning economists tend to predict stronger economic growth when a Republican is president than Democrats doand because of this partisan optimism, their forecasts end up being less accurate. Im an economist, and my colleagues and I found this by analyzing nearly 40 years of responses to The Wall Street Journals Economic Forecasting Survey. Unlike most such surveys, the Journal publishes each forecasters name, allowing us to link their predictions to their political affiliations. The respondents were professional economists at major banks, consulting firms, and universities whose forecasts help guide financial markets and business decisions. Out of more than 300 economists in our sample, we could identify the political affiliations of 122. We did this by looking at the forecasters political donation records, voter registration data, and work histories with partisan groups. The pattern was striking: Republican forecasters systematically predicted higher gross domestic product growth when their party controlled the presidency, representing roughly 10% to 15% of average growth rates during our study period. When we examined forecast accuracy using real-time GDP data, Republican forecasters made larger errors when their preferred party held office. This suggests partisan optimism makes their professional judgment worse. What makes this finding particularly notable is its asymmetry. The partisan gap emerged specifically during Republican presidencies. Under Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden, Republican and Democratic forecasters made virtually identical predictions. That wasnt the case when George W. Bush, and later Donald Trump, occupied the White House. Interestingly, this bias appears only in GDP forecasts. When we analyzed predictions for inflation, unemployment, and interest rates, we found no systematic differences between Republican and Democratic forecasters. That makes sense, because GDP forecasts are inherently more uncertain than other economic predictions. Professional forecasters tend to disagree more and make more mistakes when predicting GDP compared to inflation or unemployment rates. This creates opportunities for partisan ideologies to sneak in. We traced the bias to different views about the effectiveness of tax policies. Using Google Trends data to measure when tax cuts were in the news, we found Republican forecasters become systematically more optimistic precisely when tax policy discussions heat up. Why it matters Previous research has found that most people have a strong partisan bias when they make economic predictions. Our work is the first to show that professional economists can also succumb to such influencesdespite their training and market incentives to be accurate. Their errors can come at a high price. Financial markets, policymakers, and businesses rely on economists forecasts to make major decisions. When the Federal Reserve sets interest rates, when companies plan investments, and when investors allocate portfolios, they often reference these professional consensus forecasts. Our research challenges a common assumption in economics: Aggregating diverse expert forecasts eliminates individual biases and improves accuracy. This doesnt mean professional forecasters are incompetent or dishonest. These are highly trained economists with strong financial incentives for accuracy. Rather, our findings reveal how even experts with the best intentions can be unconsciously influenced by their own ideological beliefsespecially when dealing with inherently uncertain data. What still isnt known Several important questions remain unanswered. Its unclear how this bias might be reduced. Would making forecasters more aware of their political leanings help reduce the effect? Or would developing new forecasting methods that weight predictions based on historical accuracy during different political regimes improve consensus forecasts? Were also curious whether institutional factors matter. Might forecasters at institutions with explicit political diversity policies show less bias? How do international forecasters viewing the U.S. economy compare to domestic ones? Finally, our research focuses on U.S. forecasters during a period of increasing political polarization. Whether similar patterns emerge in other countries with different political systems, or during less polarized times, remains an open question. The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work. Aeimit Lakdawala is an associate professor of economics at Wake Forest University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
Weve all seen the AI-generated Jesus cradling the late conservative pundit Charlie Kirk in his arms and carrying him to the gates of heaven, right? According to a number of Facebook posts, everyone from Bruce Springsteen to Bob Dylan supposedly paused to honor Kirk after the right-wing activist and Turning Point USA founder’s assassination in Utah earlier this month, Rolling Stone reports. Of course, the tributes are just as fake as AI Jesus. One post, from a Facebook page titled US News, shows a distraught Springsteen laying flowers at a Kirk memorial. He took a deep breath, looked toward Kirks young daughters, and said through shaking words: Ive buried friends, Ive buried heroes . . . but watching children lose a father cuts deeper than any song Ive ever written, the caption reads. This never happened. Another post claims Bob Dylan performed outside Turning Point USA headquarters, surrounded by weeping crowds, candles, and flowers. Witnesses say he played a trembling acoustic version of ‘Blowin in the Wind’ before whispering, Give me back my brother, the caption reads. This never happened. Rolling Stone also identified a post alleging that Led Zeppelins Robert Plant stopped his Nashville show mid-set to dedicate a performance of God Bless America to Kirk. Again, never happened. None of the musicians depicted in these memes has commented publicly on Kirks death. The aftermath of his assassination has been a maelstrom of misinformation, much of it taking the form of AI-generated slop on platforms like X and Facebook. (Fast Company has reached out to Meta and X for comment.) How many MAGA grandmas are believing this and sharing it? wrote one Facebook commenter. So far I’ve seen the same thing from Bob Seger, John Fogerty, Rod Stewart, Metallica, and now Robert Plant, another added. Who’s next? Elvis Presley? For anyone willing to think longer than a split second, these posts are obviously fake. Yet with the internet drowning in slop and misinformationmuch of it far more convincing than Dylan performing at a vigilit has become second nature to question everything online. Even the official White House statement mourning Kirks death sparked conspiracy theories, with some users pointing to Donald Trumps left pinky as proof the scene was fabricated. These days, its AI until proven otherwise.
Category:
E-Commerce
Brené Brown, a research professor at the University of Houston, delivered a TED Talk in 2010 on the power of vulnerability thats since been viewed nearly 70 million times, making her a self-help guru and something of a cultural icon. Since then, 150,000 leaders across the globe have taken her workshops on leading with courage. Her new book, Strong Ground, delves into lessons from these workshops. At the 11th annual Fast Company Innovation Festival in New York on September 17, Brown discussed with senior editor Jon Gluck why we need strong leaders now more than ever. Here are her top three insights on leadership she shared at the event: 1. Were in the middle of a collective AI panic attackand need to take a breath. Brown said that when it comes to AI, most CEOs are like 5-year-olds playing soccer, kicking the ball every which way, going, Okay, what do we want to do? I don’t give a shit, just have a strategy. We might be in the middle of an AI wave, after allbut that doesnt mean companies are being thoughtful or strategic about how they are deploying AI. According to research from MIT, more than 95% of AI investments are not profitable. Companies are failing to align AI investments with business strategy. We need to get the ball, look down the pitch strategically, take a breath, and pass the ball, Brown said. We’re going too fast. . . . We’re scared. [Photo: Eugene Gologursky for Fast Company] 2. Real organizational transformation requires breaking things. Were burned out on buzzwords like transformation because most incremental changes are marketed as transformations. But Brown said actual, meaningful change that can reinvent companies requires breaking shit. The hardest thing about a real transformation is you’re going to need to break some shit. You’re going to need a very serious assessment of what is working in your organization: the systems, the processes, the people, she said. You also need a very real assessment of whats not working, and let it go. And what you have to put on the chopping block with transformation is some of your darlings, Brown said. 3. Want people to listen to you? Be preparedand honest. Brown said shes been told she has executive presence (a term she called a cover for shitting on introverts and women). But she says what others call a certain presence is really all about preparation. Before a meeting with executives, Brown will put in hours listening to the investor calls, researching the points she doesnt understand, and watching interviews with the CEO so she can ask incisive questions. I try to be prepared. That may be over-functioning from being the only woman in a lot of rooms in my career, she said. But in addition to doing her homework, she also prioritizes being truthful, even if its unpalatable. I try to not give a shit whether you like me or not. I’m honest. I try to just be very truthful. And I think if people listen to what I say, maybe it’s because they trust that I’m going to tell the truth, she said. And if I can’t, I don’t talk. Watch the whole interview here.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||