In a recent paper in the Journal of Economics Perspectives, Philip Levine and Melissa Kearney use some novel techniques and data on miscarriages to ask whether teenage mums have children because they are poor or are they poor because they have children (their paper is available here and you can read Slate's coverage here). Interestingly, their evidence seems to indicate that teenage girls have children because they live in impoverished circumstances with poor future prospects. This, of course, raises questions about the future prospects of the offspring of teenage mothers. What role can public policy play in dealing with this issue? Does rising inequality and reduced social mobility make it harder for poor teenagers to escape the poverty trap?
Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, James Kwak and Todd Mitton have written a paper on whether firms connected to Timothy Geithner benefited from these connections. They do so by looking at how stocks of these firms reacted to the announcement that he was a nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008. They find that there were large abnormal returns for connected firms. Below is the paper's abstract and the full paper is available here . The announcement of Timothy Geithner as nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008 produced a cumulative abnormal return for financial firms with which he had a connection. This return was about 6% after the first full day of trading and about 12% after ten trading days. There were subsequently abnormal negative returns for connected firms when news broke that Geithner's confirmation might be derailed by tax issues. Excess returns for connected firms may reflect the perceived impact of relying on the advice of a small ne...