Dinis Rocha
LightNews LightNews
dinisrocha.bsky.social
Dinis Rocha
@dinisrocha.bsky.social
61 followers 270 following 0 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
jay.bsky.team
the feminine urge to
Bluesky CEO: imagine a 'world without Caesars'
Jay Graber dunks on Mark Zuckerberg without mentioning his name.
mashable.com
March 10, 2025 at 10:57 PM
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
lastpositivist.bsky.social
...I thought we agreed re the content of standard ideals of masculinity, that was common ground. We just then disagreed about whether all and only men should be stoic, rational, commanding figures, self-appointed warrior protector providers. But I did think we agreed that was the masculine ideal...
March 1, 2025 at 9:28 AM
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
tedmccormick.bsky.social
Writing down in my day planner that the President said an oligarchy is taking shape made up of ultrarich people taking control of politics and media. Note to self to watch out for that
January 16, 2025 at 12:35 PM
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
tedmccormick.bsky.social
ow! my market forces! I'm not supposed to get politics on them
January 7, 2025 at 6:34 PM
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
misterabk.bsky.social
I'm thinking today of the people we lost: "socially liberal but fiscally conservative" guys. They used to be everywhere. I, for one, did not foresee them all turning out to be socially conservative.
December 31, 2024 at 10:10 AM
Reposted by Dinis Rocha
economeager.bsky.social
this abstract is INSANE
We estimate productivity growth in England from 1250 to 1870. Real wages over this period were heavily influenced by plague-induced swings in the population. Our estimates account for these Malthusian dynamics. We find that productivity growth was zero prior to 1600. Productivity growth began in 1600—almost a century before the Glorious Revolution. Thus, the onset of productivity growth preceded the bourgeois institutional reforms of 17th century England. We estimate productivity growth of 2% per decade between 1600 and 1800, increasing to 5% per decade between 1810 and 1860. Much of the increase in output growth during the Industrial Revolution is explained by structural change—the falling importance of land in production—rather than faster productivity growth. Stagnant real wages in the 18th and early 19th centuries—“Engel’s Pause”—is explained by rapid population growth putting downward pressure on real wages. Yet, feedback from population growth to real wages is sufficiently weak to permit sustained deviations from the “iron law of wages” prior to the Industrial Revolution.
December 28, 2024 at 1:04 PM