Busting Myths: Misery Index, Menopause Treatments, and Neurodiverse Love
Economics (inflation and jobs), demystifying menopause, exploring neurodiversity. Gain insights on Net Zero, AI economics, and disability rights movement.
Menopause: Investing life
Neurodiverse family life: Love, fear and butterflies
UK economics: inflation and jobs, misery
Chris Stark: speaking on Net Zero
Tyler Cowen: AI and economics
David Ruebain: disability, equality and the law
Impact investing: feedback wanted
Comedy Director: Wanted
FRC: Advisory (Sustainability Disclosure) board members wanted; also grants, octupus and morals.
Is life in the UK as bad as the 1970s? Look at the misery index. The misery index is an economic indicator, created by economist Arthur Okun. The index helps determine how the average citizen is doing economically. The index is calculated by adding the unemployment rate to the inflation rate. It is assumed that both a higher rate of unemployment and a worsening of inflation create economic and social costs for a country.
On this measure while unemployment remains low, inflation has risen making matters arguably worse for the average citizen. But, the situation while worse than the 1990s and 2000s remains better than the 1970s.
If unemployment can remain low and inflation moderates then the picture will look much better. Some economists (cf. Hanke) might argue that unemployment should have a more important weight as a lack of a job is more costly than inflation. If you agree, then the situation seems better. Do you agree unemployment is more important than inflation? Do you have stories from the 1970s?
An amazing aspect of investing for a curious person like me is that I get to explore quite deeply many facets of what makes us human. I do this to find an understanding of how the world and humans actually work. You can not invest successfully - in this way - unless you can understand how life works (not how you would like it to work, not how others might like it to work, but how it actually works).
This week I have spent several hours learning about how the menopause and its symptoms are assessed and treated. There are foundational medical and economics aspects to this learning. How many women enter the menopause (1-2m a year in US, perhaps 1bn globally in menopause; and how accurate or not this data is), how many people seek treatment, what the treatments are (hormone, non-hormone) and why US prescriptions were higher (eg 20m in the 1990s) and now 6-7m (due in part to media coverage of small absolute risks with hormone treatments) and whether that might change.
But there are many social issues to consider as well. Which communities consider this a taboo subject, how is this changing, why people do or do not seek treatment; and then access - who controls access to what treatments, at what cost and in what treatment cadences. (Answer me this: do women like to spend money on themselves, or do they prioritize spending on their family? How does this interact with wealth, and how many women would not blink at $6000 dollars a year on a treatment or not).
There are many other challenges too. Education, can women find the information they want when they do to primary care (and I spoke mostly with specialists) - do primary care doctors know the protocols? Can they give the information required? Country differences…. and on and on….
This is entirely fascinating and also necessary to understand where a new treatment might fit in. Aside from all that, my overall take is that women who have vasomotor symptoms (hot flushes etc.) should definitely speak to their doctor, and that there are many pretty safe and fairly effective treatments already with one more class (NK or Neurokinin Receptor Antagonists) currently newly approved and at least to one doctor I spoke to receiving enthusiasm (of course, not medical advice etc. etc.) but individual variation can be high.
Anoushka has written a piece on our family. She starts:
“It is your stillness that I notice. You are looking through the glass door that leads to the garden. Arms rigid by your sides, legs tense, hands balled into fists.
“The garden is dangerous,” you announce. “There is a butterfly.”
I stand behind you and see the pale lemon insect, fluttering bright against the dark laurel tree. This is not a new thought of yours but I am surprised again by the mismatch between your perception of butterflies and the thing itself.
“It’s a beautiful colour,” I venture. “Don’t you think it looks like it is dancing?”
These were not the words I was going to say. I was going to tell you that you were wrong. They’re not scary. But you are scared and to say otherwise would deny your reality, the adrenaline spiking in your bloodstream, the thumping in your chest. So, I have invited you to pay attention instead. I have learned that anxiety is a disorder of avoidance. If you can stay here, behind the glass, perhaps your nervous system will settle and your body will learn a different story.”
More here in her blog touching on neurodiversity, fears, family and love.
This week I hosted Chris Stark (CEO Climate Change Committee) for a chat at Chatham House - thanks to all who came. The recording will be out later. We did cover some new ground, and how the US IRA is developing is definitely being notices in policy circles; and also the hybrid forms of carbon price + standards which might work.
Until the new chat is out, you can listen to our Feb chat and this would be the summary on corporate net zero. This was the GPT summary on that question:
🌟 Corporate commitments to net zero are truly remarkable and show a significant shift in the corporate community's mindset. Just five years ago, this discussion wouldn't have been happening. It's clear that corporations now recognize the importance of solid climate commitments, not just for social license but also for attracting top talent and meeting customer demands. This is undeniably a positive development.
🌟 Many corporates have made strong and legitimate commitments to achieve net zero, which is commendable. However, my concerns arise from the challenge of defining a clear path to net zero, especially for smaller businesses. Take Microsoft, for example, as a shining example of a company that not only aims for net zero but also plans to go negative, actively undoing the harm caused by their energy usage. While that's fantastic, most corporations don't have the same resources.
🌟 There's often a rush to adopt net zero targets, with some corporations setting ambitious dates even ahead of global goals. This is encouraging, as it pushes them to aim higher. However, it's essential to scrutinize the means by which these targets will be achieved. Differentiating between scopes (such as scope one, two, and three emissions) is crucial. Scope one refers to emissions directly caused by a company, while scope three encompasses emissions from the supply chain. It becomes challenging to determine a good target when considering these complex factors.
🌟 It's worth noting that achieving net zero for countries like the UK will heavily rely on corporate investment and support. Public investments alone won't suffice. Hence, it's crucial to have corporations onboard with the net zero agenda. However, I worry that there's currently a rush to reach net zero without a proper plan in place. Corporations may find themselves committed but lacking viable options to reduce emissions across all scopes. They might resort to inexpensive measures like adding solar panels or implementing travel policies, which may not yield substantial emission reductions.
🌟 This is where the issue of offsets becomes significant. Currently, there are many low-cost offsets available, primarily in the forestry sector. While these offsets (can be) legitimate and contribute to the solution [BEN: small hallucination here, there is a decent amount of skepticism on authentic offsets), they're often cheaper than implementing more challenging emission reduction strategies. To address this, it's essential to engage corporates in a dialogue about their role within the larger system and help them understand the most impactful steps they can take.
🌟 For service sector-dominated economies like the UK, the majority of emissions are tied to energy consumption in buildings, particularly electricity usage. While it may seem logical to install solar panels on rooftops, it's important to consider the context. Over the next decade, the UK will likely transition to a fully decarbonized power system. In light of this, it's wiser to invest in decarbonizing the corporate vehicle fleet and adopting heat pumps for heating buildings, even though these steps may be costlier. Although they may not achieve net zero immediately, they significantly contribute to the country's and the world's overall decarbonization efforts.
In summary, while corporate commitments to net zero are a positive step, it's vital to ensure that the means to achieve these targets are well-defined, encompassing all scopes and considering the larger system. Encouraging corporates to prioritize impactful actions that align with the country's decarbonization goals will yield more meaningful and long-lasting results for our shared future.
I put out my excellent chat with David Ruebain. One of my initial impulses for this chat was David’s argument on how protest movements have helped social movements, and what lessons we can draw for the climate movement.
David Ruebain is one of the most thoughtful thinkers I know on disability, equality and the law. He is currently a Pro-Vice Chancellor at the University of Sussex with strategic responsibility for Culture, Equality and Inclusion including dignity and respect. He is an adviser to the football premier league, the former director of legal policy at the equality and human rights commission and has been in the top 25 most influential disabled people in the UK.
We chat on:
Social change seems to come about in a complex way. But peaceful protests seem to have had influence on some social topics. What is the importance of protest? In particular, thinking about the disability rights movement.
David gives insights into his role and view into the UK disability rights movement. The roles of agency and simplicity of message. The comparison with the climate protest movements.
David’s work with the UK football premier league and also the equality commission. What types of policies are successful for equality and diversity. What challenges are structural and what that implies for solutions.
The role of interdependence and that means at the moment. Whether the law can deliver inclusion and what that means.
How ordinary talking about equality seems now vs the 1970s. But how it itself will not be enough for humanity.
“Equality is what we all wanted in the seventies; for those of us who considered ourselves progressive. But now it feels fairly vanilla really as an idea. Equality is simply about level playing fields, with its sort of a zero sum game approach to if two people are in a race, nobody should be unfairly disadvantaged for any relevant consideration, which of course is true. It's sort of almost unarguable. But it isn't especially ambitious. … But if we are really to bring about the change which will ensure the survival of the species and other species, it will need more than equality, I think.”
We end on David’s current projects and life advice.
“....do what you need to do to believe in yourself because so many of us don't or doubt ourselves. That doesn't mean to say-- I think first of all, that knowing there's nothing profoundly wrong with anyone, including whoever you are. But secondly, knowing that from that perspective you get to learn and evolve; it doesn't mean you stay rigid in the position. So there's something the risk of sounding like a not very good therapist. There's something about really believing in yourself…”
Tyler Cowen gave the Hayek lecture in London this week. Tyler is funny (he could do with even more jokes!) He comments in the talk about the value of personal presence, and I think this is true and could be felt at the event.
I make a short summary of my notes below. Suitable for a tweet thread. Then in the blog I give you a few versions that GPT-4 did, after basic prompting and me feeding the very bad YouTube auto transcript including time stamps into it (unfortunately I needed to put into sections). I also asked GPT-4 to rate Tyler’s lecture (see blog!)
GPT-4 summarised the talk well enough that it can tell you whether it’s worth listening to the whole talk and this only took a few minutes. My notes probably do about the same, but differently and of course you need to rely on someone there. I don’t think I saw any other note takers. Of course…. Context is (still) that which is scarce.
My short notes:
We have invented AI that is better than humans in many areas.
How should we think about this in economic terms ?
We have a research assistant, colleague and architect. Not a carpenter or gardener.
One argument. We have increased the capital stock. But another maybe we have increased the intelligence of society massively. So in that sense it’s labour. A new factor of production.
What is worth more? Or less?
Less.
1. Routine back office work, you are worth less. 2. Memorising facts is worth less.
Personal charisma will be worth more. Looks and how you come across more. Personal networks will be worth more.
Physical Co-ordination, carpenters and gardeners should be worth more. People who can manage having an assistant will do better.
How should capital be revalued ? Many forms of Labour are now less scarce. So long electricity, long some hardware.
The AI will be commodified. The gains will go to the users. No one is talking about Gutenberg the billionaire.
Central planning going to be harder. More projects, more complexity harder to centrally plan.
Economic insights rooted in Smith, Hayek. Decentralised systems hard to take over.
AI Can’t work in physical space. Think of it like Humans and dogs have co-evolved.
The AI is going to have its own economy. It’s own laws, it’s own economy. Maybe crypto.
Blog here and where GPT rates his lecture.
On impacting investing the founder of an impact assessment initiative writes me:
"Total Portfolio Project is a non-profit initiative that has developed a next-generation approach to integrating impact into financial analysis. Their open-source methodology results in 'impact returns' that can be treated on par with financial returns when making investment decisions. They are seeking constructive feedback on their new report that assesses the impact returns of a selection of high-profile investments. They would also love suggestions on what cases they should analyze next.
Link to the report:link.total-portfolio.org/IRcases"
Do look them up and or you can send me comments if this is your area.
Comedy Director: Wanted
Theatre friends. My pal Alice Bragg has a one-woman comedy show riffing on the absurdities of lock down going to Edinburgh. She’s looking for a director (paid) preferably with comedy and Edinburgh experience. Let me know if might suit and I can put you in touch. Thanks.
FRC: Advisory board members wanted
Financial Reporting Council (FRC) are seeking members and a talented and influential chair for the new UK Sustainability Disclosure Technical Advisory Committee (“the TAC”). The TAC will be responsible for providing recommendations to DBT on endorsing the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (“ISSB”) IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards for use in the UK. The Chair will also be expected to lead the TAC’s influencing work with the ISSB. This is a challenging and high-profile role that will play a crucial part in the development of sustainability disclosures in the UK, and internationally. Job description: Chair - Sustainability Disclosures Technical Advisory Committee and Members - Sustainability Disclosures Technical Advisory Committee.
Links and quick hits:
If you are working on stuff that might substantially improve the future of humanity, consider applying to Lightspeed Grants, a new funding program just launched: https://lightspeedgrants.org We are distributing $5M, applications close July 6th. Get a response in 14 days.
We are not less moral? If you think people are less moral than they used to be, you're not alone. But you're probably wrong. See new Nature paper from Dan Gilbert and Adam M.
Octopuses Redesign Their Own Brains When They Get Chilly. Hyperintelligent octopuses just got weirder, when scientists found they can recode their brains when temperatures change….
The Economist is looking to hire a Britain economics writer, based in London. Journalistic experience is not necessary. The ability to write clearly and entertainingly is crucial. So is a thorough understanding of economics and an ability to work with data. https://www.economist.com/britain-econ-job