<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Economist Blog</title>
	
	<link>http://www.economistblog.com</link>
	<description>Discussing the economy from A to Z</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/EconomistBlog" type="application/rss+xml" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>EconomistBlog</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
		<title>From the Department of Unbiased Research</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/vrsUYSHvNrs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/from-the-department-of-unbiased-research/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8138</guid>
		<description>Submitted by unsettling economics
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an assortment of national business groups opposed to President Obama’s health-care reform effort are collecting money to finance an economic study that could be used to portray the legislation as a job killer and threat to the nation’s economy, according to an e-mail solicitation from a [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/vrsUYSHvNrs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/from-the-department-of-unbiased-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/from-the-department-of-unbiased-research/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>WASHINGTON’S NEW MATH</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/RRtv3_A_OlM/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/washington%e2%80%99s-new-math/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8136</guid>
		<description>Submitted by The Capital Spectator
Only in the hallowed halls of Congress could the notion of spending vastly higher amounts of money convince so many that the net result will be a reduction in spending. But such is the conceit with the new health care bill being hammered out these days.
The new legislation to expand health [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/RRtv3_A_OlM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/washington%e2%80%99s-new-math/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/washington%e2%80%99s-new-math/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>SLOW BURN</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/AkrpCrYB8Ww/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/slow-burn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:21:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8134</guid>
		<description>Submitted by The Capital Spectator
Today’s update on weekly jobless claims may be the warning sign. New filings for jobless benefits were unchanged last week, hovering at 505,000, matching the previous week’s tally. Although this number is down sharply from it’s recessionary peak of 674,000, set back in late-March, 500k reflects distress in the labor market. [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/AkrpCrYB8Ww" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/slow-burn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/slow-burn/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>GDP: Revisions and Forecasts</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/4PAE_MTB7cQ/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/gdp-revisions-and-forecasts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8132</guid>
		<description>Submitted by Econbrowser
There&amp;#8217;s been some discussion of how the GDP estimates for 2009Q3 might be revised downward in light of the September trade release [1]. e-Forecasting has presented its latest estimates up to October, and Macroeconomic Advisers through September. Macroeconomic Advisers writes:


&amp;#8230;The increase in September was more than accounted for by a large positive contribution [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/4PAE_MTB7cQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/gdp-revisions-and-forecasts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/gdp-revisions-and-forecasts/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Share of World GDP Remarkably Constant</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/cPWfMbwp6Z0/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/us-share-of-world-gdp-remarkably-constant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:15:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8129</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
Somewhat surprisingly, the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture has some great international historical macroeconomic datasets. According to its website:
The International Macroeconomic Data Set provides data from 1969 through 2020 for real (adjusted for inflation) gross domestic product (GDP), population, real exchange rates, and other variables for the 190 [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/cPWfMbwp6Z0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/us-share-of-world-gdp-remarkably-constant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/us-share-of-world-gdp-remarkably-constant/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Leading Indicators Rise for 7th Month to 2-Yr. High</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/JVJGDWDYBT4/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/leading-indicators-rise-for-7th-month-to-2-yr-high/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:12:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8127</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM

The Leading Economic Index (LEI) increased for the 7th straight month to 103.8, the highest level since the fall of 2007, and the first time in more than five years of 7-consecutive monthly increases (since early 2004). 



Details: 
Six of the ten indicators that make up The Conference Board LEI for the [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/JVJGDWDYBT4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/leading-indicators-rise-for-7th-month-to-2-yr-high/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/leading-indicators-rise-for-7th-month-to-2-yr-high/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Odds for Health Care Reform Fall From 50% to 2%</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/tohXSFzDMzI/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/odds-for-health-care-reform-fall-from-50-to-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8125</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
 Last summer the odds for a federal government-run health insurance plan to be approved before the end of the year were around 50%, according to futures contracts traded on Intrade.com. Those odds have now fallen to a contract-low of only 2.2%. Odds for health care reform passing by March 2010 or [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/tohXSFzDMzI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/odds-for-health-care-reform-fall-from-50-to-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/odds-for-health-care-reform-fall-from-50-to-2/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Jobless Claims (Four-Wk. Avg.) Drop for 11th Straight Week to 514,000, Lowest Level in A Year</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/XYF3mIWGf8E/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/jobless-claims-four-wk-avg-drop-for-11th-straight-week-to-514000-lowest-level-in-a-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:07:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8123</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
Weekly jobless claims fell for the 11th straight week to 514,000 (four-week moving average), reaching the lowest level in a year (since November 15, 2008), according to today&amp;#8217;s report from the Department of Labor (see chart above).
Visit 1800blogger to see all of our industry leading blogs.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/XYF3mIWGf8E" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/jobless-claims-four-wk-avg-drop-for-11th-straight-week-to-514000-lowest-level-in-a-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/19/jobless-claims-four-wk-avg-drop-for-11th-straight-week-to-514000-lowest-level-in-a-year/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>THE NEW NEW BALANCING ACT</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/SUd0u6NhaDo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/the-new-new-balancing-act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8119</guid>
		<description>Submitted by The Capital Spectator
Definitive statements about the future are always suspect in finance and economics, but it’s reasonable to assume that the threat of deflation as a clear and present danger has passed. But we can’t say for sure. To the extent that a double-dip recession remains a possibility, so too will does hazard [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/SUd0u6NhaDo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/the-new-new-balancing-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/the-new-new-balancing-act/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Receiver operating characteristics curve</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/357CbSu8CkE/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/receiver-operating-characteristics-curve/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:47:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8117</guid>
		<description>Submitted by Econbrowser
Travis Berge and Oscar Jorda of the University of California, Davis have an interesting new paper on statistical criteria for distinguishing economic expansions from recessions.


Berge and Jorda evaluate rules of the form that would declare the economy to be in a recession when some indicator Yt falls below a specified threshold c, for [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/357CbSu8CkE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/receiver-operating-characteristics-curve/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/receiver-operating-characteristics-curve/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Assessing the Impact of Government Policy on Widget Consumption and Widget Sector Capital Usage</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/i_qVpmp_fhY/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/assessing-the-impact-of-government-policy-on-widget-consumption-and-widget-sector-capital-usage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:44:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8115</guid>
		<description>Submitted by Econbrowser
Let supply and demand for widgets (y) be given by the following two equations, respectively:
(1) yt = αt + β x t + ε t
 
(2) yt = γ + δ x t + Γ z t + u t


Where x is the relative price of widgets, z is a government procurement policy for [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/i_qVpmp_fhY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/assessing-the-impact-of-government-policy-on-widget-consumption-and-widget-sector-capital-usage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/assessing-the-impact-of-government-policy-on-widget-consumption-and-widget-sector-capital-usage/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Real Estate Recovery in So. California: Home Sales Increase 16th Straight Month, Prices 6rd Month</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/E-fWlxtZvUM/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/real-estate-recovery-in-so-california-home-sales-increase-16th-straight-month-prices-6rd-month/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:41:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8113</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
 
Southern California home sales rose in October as prices showed more signs of firming. The median sale price fell by the smallest amount in two years, the result of a shrinking inventory of homes for sale and government and industry efforts to stoke demand and curtail foreclosures. Last month 22,132 new [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/E-fWlxtZvUM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/real-estate-recovery-in-so-california-home-sales-increase-16th-straight-month-prices-6rd-month/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/real-estate-recovery-in-so-california-home-sales-increase-16th-straight-month-prices-6rd-month/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Expanding Coverage = Increased Costs for Current Dysfunctional Health Care System, Less Innovation</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/exlSIWDNxTk/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/expanding-coverage-increased-costs-for-current-dysfunctional-health-care-system-less-innovation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:38:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8110</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
Our health-care system suffers from problems of cost, access and quality, and needs major reform. Tax policy drives employment-based insurance; this begets overinsurance and drives costs upward while creating inequities for the unemployed and self-employed. A regulatory morass limits innovation. Deep flaws in Medicare and Medicaid drive spending without optimizing care.
Speeches and [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/exlSIWDNxTk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/expanding-coverage-increased-costs-for-current-dysfunctional-health-care-system-less-innovation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/expanding-coverage-increased-costs-for-current-dysfunctional-health-care-system-less-innovation/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>More Selective Concern on Sex Imbalances</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/7W08nBbSVMU/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/more-selective-concern-on-sex-imbalances/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8108</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM

From a new report &amp;#8220;Staying Competitive: Patching America’s Leaky Pipeline in the Sciences&amp;#8221; from the Center for American Progress:
The “leaky pipeline” for women in the sciences, sometimes referred to as the “pool problem” because of the low number of women in job applicant pools relative to their rates of doctoral degrees granted, [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/7W08nBbSVMU" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/more-selective-concern-on-sex-imbalances/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/more-selective-concern-on-sex-imbalances/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Baltic Dry Index Roars Back: 102.5% Gain in 39 Days</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~3/UgtZXloZ68A/</link>
		<comments>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/baltic-dry-index-roars-back-1025-gain-in-39-days/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:29:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.economistblog.com/?p=8106</guid>
		<description>Submitted by CARPE DIEM
 The Baltic Dry Index closed today at 4381, advancing for the 14th straight day, and registering positive gains in 31 out of the last 35 days. From the late-September low of 2163, the benchmark index for freight costs to ship dry bulk commodities such as iron ore, coal and grains has [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EconomistBlog/~4/UgtZXloZ68A" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/baltic-dry-index-roars-back-1025-gain-in-39-days/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.economistblog.com/2009/11/18/baltic-dry-index-roars-back-1025-gain-in-39-days/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss>
