2.97 score from hupso.pl for:
baselinescenario.com



HTML Content


Titlethe baseline scenario | what happened to the global economy and what we can do about it

Length: 87, Words: 16
Description what happened to the global economy and what we can do about it

Length: 63, Words: 13
Keywords pusty
Robots
Charset UTF-8
Og Meta - Title exist
Og Meta - Description exist
Og Meta - Site name exist
Tytuł powinien zawierać pomiędzy 10 a 70 znaków (ze spacjami), a mniej niż 12 słów w długości.
Meta opis powinien zawierać pomiędzy 50 a 160 znaków (łącznie ze spacjami), a mniej niż 24 słów w długości.
Kodowanie znaków powinny być określone , UTF-8 jest chyba najlepszy zestaw znaków, aby przejść z powodu UTF-8 jest bardziej międzynarodowy kodowaniem.
Otwarte obiekty wykresu powinny być obecne w stronie internetowej (więcej informacji na temat protokołu OpenGraph: http://ogp.me/)

SEO Content

Words/Characters 3306
Text/HTML 29.67 %
Headings H1 1
H2 7
H3 11
H4 0
H5 0
H6 0
H1
the baseline scenario
H2
the importance of fairness: a new economic vision for the democratic party
economism and arbitration clauses
how markets work
fees add up
soak the poor, feed the rich
review copies of economism
why is connecticut giving its employees’ money to the asset management industry?
H3
baseline scenario on facebook
simon
simon on twitter
our first book
our second book
james’s new book
james
james on twitter
recent posts
archives
links
H4
H5
H6
strong
the fine print (updated): 
amazon u.s.
b
i
the fine print (updated): 
amazon u.s.
em the fine print (updated): 
amazon u.s.
Bolds strong 2
b 0
i 2
em 2
Zawartość strony internetowej powinno zawierać więcej niż 250 słów, z stopa tekst / kod jest wyższy niż 20%.
Pozycji używać znaczników (h1, h2, h3, ...), aby określić temat sekcji lub ustępów na stronie, ale zwykle, użyj mniej niż 6 dla każdego tagu pozycje zachować swoją stronę zwięzły.
Styl używać silnych i kursywy znaczniki podkreślić swoje słowa kluczowe swojej stronie, ale nie nadużywać (mniej niż 16 silnych tagi i 16 znaczników kursywy)

Statystyki strony

twitter:title pusty
twitter:description pusty
google+ itemprop=name pusty
Pliki zewnętrzne 19
Pliki CSS 3
Pliki javascript 16
Plik należy zmniejszyć całkowite odwołanie plików (CSS + JavaScript) do 7-8 maksymalnie.

Linki wewnętrzne i zewnętrzne

Linki 167
Linki wewnętrzne 5
Linki zewnętrzne 162
Linki bez atrybutu Title 146
Linki z atrybutem NOFOLLOW 0
Linki - Użyj atrybutu tytuł dla każdego łącza. Nofollow link jest link, który nie pozwala wyszukiwarkom boty zrealizują są odnośniki no follow. Należy zwracać uwagę na ich użytkowania

Linki wewnętrzne

skip to content #content
james.kwak@uconn.edu mailto:james.kwak@uconn.edu
my tweets
my tweets
cancel #

Linki zewnętrzne

the baseline scenario https://baselinescenario.com/
about https://baselinescenario.com/about/
13 bankers http://13bankers.com
white house burning http://whitehouseburning.com
read more https://baselinescenario.com/read-more/
follow us https://baselinescenario.com/follow-us/
older posts https://baselinescenario.com/page/2/
the importance of fairness: a new economic vision for the democratic party https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
19 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/#comments
senator bernie sanders http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-voters_us_58c1ac90e4b054a0ea68fa17
much smaller margin https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html
continue reading https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/#more-16694
19 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/#comments
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
democratic party https://baselinescenario.com/tag/democratic-party/
economics https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economics/
economism https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economism/
politics https://baselinescenario.com/tag/politics/
economism and arbitration clauses https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
10 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/#comments
opening millions of new accounts https://baselinescenario.com/2016/09/22/wells-fargo-and-the-cult-of-the-customer/
continue reading https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/#more-16618
10 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/#comments
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
cfpb https://baselinescenario.com/tag/cfpb/
economism https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economism/
law https://baselinescenario.com/tag/law/
wells fargo https://baselinescenario.com/tag/wells-fargo/
how markets work https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
5 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/#comments
out https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/costestimate/hr1628aspassed.pdf
times article https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/24/upshot/cbo-has-clear-message-about-losers-in-house-health-bill.html?hp
continue reading https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/#more-16543
5 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/#comments
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
economism https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economism/
health care https://baselinescenario.com/tag/health-care/
health insurance https://baselinescenario.com/tag/health-insurance/
trumpcare https://baselinescenario.com/tag/trumpcare/
fees add up https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/22/fees-add-up/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/22/fees-add-up/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
5 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/22/fees-add-up/#comments
good with computers https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-quants-run-wall-street-now-1495389108
fama and french 2010 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01598.x/abstract
the big squeeze http://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/bigsqueeze_may2017.pdf
5 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/22/fees-add-up/#comments
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
asset management https://baselinescenario.com/tag/asset-management/
pension funds https://baselinescenario.com/tag/pension-funds/
retirement https://baselinescenario.com/tag/retirement/
soak the poor, feed the rich https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
21 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/#comments
repeal and replace obamacare https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/us/politics/affordable-care-act-obamacare-health.html
continue reading https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/#more-16415
21 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/#comments
commentary https://baselinescenario.com/category/commentary/
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
health care https://baselinescenario.com/tag/health-care/
health insurance https://baselinescenario.com/tag/health-insurance/
obamacare https://baselinescenario.com/tag/obamacare/
trumpcare https://baselinescenario.com/tag/trumpcare/
review copies of economism https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/05/review-copies-of-economism/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/05/review-copies-of-economism/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
1 comment https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/05/review-copies-of-economism/#comments
economism http://economism.net
financial times https://www.ft.com/content/331ff894-f876-11e6-bd4e-68d53499ed71
, martin https://www.ft.com/content/331ff894-f876-11e6-bd4e-68d53499ed71
economists https://economism.net/endorsements-6b1720b048e4#.fx1sryq0m
dani rodrik https://twitter.com/rodrikdani/status/805903995030138880
noah smith https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-01-19/the-ways-that-pop-economics-hurt-america
economism.net http://economism.net
excerpt https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/01/economism-and-the-minimum-wage/513155/
1 comment https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/05/review-copies-of-economism/#comments
books https://baselinescenario.com/category/books/
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
economics 101 https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economics-101/
economism https://baselinescenario.com/tag/economism/
teaching https://baselinescenario.com/tag/teaching/
why is connecticut giving its employees’ money to the asset management industry? https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/30/why-is-connecticut-giving-its-employees-money-to-the-asset-management-industry/
https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/30/why-is-connecticut-giving-its-employees-money-to-the-asset-management-industry/
james kwak https://baselinescenario.com/author/jamesykwak/
4 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/30/why-is-connecticut-giving-its-employees-money-to-the-asset-management-industry/#comments
previously said https://baselinescenario.com/2016/12/21/how-not-to-invest/
trailed the s&p 500 https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/annuities/summary/favcf
4 comments https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/30/why-is-connecticut-giving-its-employees-money-to-the-asset-management-industry/#comments
commentary https://baselinescenario.com/category/commentary/
syndication https://baselinescenario.com/category/syndication/
asset management https://baselinescenario.com/tag/asset-management/
investing https://baselinescenario.com/tag/investing/
retirement savings https://baselinescenario.com/tag/retirement-savings/
older posts https://baselinescenario.com/page/2/
baseline scenario on facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/the-baseline-scenario/60785773804
baseline scenario on facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/the-baseline-scenario/60785773804
view baselinescene’s profile on twitter https://twitter.com/baselinescene/
- http://13bankers.com
- http://whitehouseburning.com
- https://economism.net/
view jamesykwak’s profile on facebook https://www.facebook.com/jamesykwak/
view jamesykwak’s profile on twitter https://twitter.com/jamesykwak/
the importance of fairness: a new economic vision for the democratic party https://baselinescenario.com/2017/06/15/telling-a-better-story-a-new-economic-vision-for-the-democratic-party/
economism and arbitration clauses https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/31/economism-and-arbitration-clauses/
how markets work https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/25/how-markets-work/
fees add up https://baselinescenario.com/2017/05/22/fees-add-up/
soak the poor, feed the rich https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/07/soak-the-poor-feed-the-rich/
review copies of economism https://baselinescenario.com/2017/03/05/review-copies-of-economism/
why is connecticut giving its employees’ money to the asset management industry? https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/30/why-is-connecticut-giving-its-employees-money-to-the-asset-management-industry/
the right to have rights https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/27/the-right-to-have-rights/
economism and economics https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/24/economism-and-economics/
economism and the law https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/23/economism-and-the-law/
economism and health care https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/20/economism-and-health-care/
conflicts and corruption https://baselinescenario.com/2017/01/12/conflicts-and-corruption/
angry bear http://angrybear.blogspot.com/
brad delong http://delong.typepad.com
calculated risk http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com
econacademics.org http://econacademics.org/
econbrowser http://www.econbrowser.com/
econlog http://econlog.econlib.org/
economic principals http://www.economicprincipals.com/
economicsuk http://economicsuk.com/blog/
economist’s view http://economistsview.typepad.com/
economists’ forum at financial times http://blogs.ft.com/wolfforum/
ezra klein http://www.vox.com/
felix salmon http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/
free exchange (the economist) http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/
imfdirect http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/
interfluidity http://www.interfluidity.com/
macroadvisers http://macroadvisers.blogspot.com/
marginal revolution http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/
mit sloan experts http://mitsloanexperts.com
money supply (ft) http://blogs.ft.com/money-supply/
naked capitalism http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/
new deal 2.0 http://www.newdeal20.org/
nouriel roubini http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/
npr planet money http://www.npr.org/rss/podcast/podcast_detail.php?siteid=94411890
oecd insights http://oecdinsights.org/
oilprice.com http://oilprice.com
paul krugman http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
paul solman http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/
peterson institute: crisis watch http://iie.com/issues/current.htm
rational irrationality http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/
real time economics (wsj) http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/
rortybomb http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/
sense on cents http://www.senseoncents.com/
the epicurean dealmaker http://epicureandealmaker.blogspot.com/
the pareto commons http://www.theparetocommons.com/
tobin project http://www.tobinproject.org
triplecrisis http://triplecrisis.com/
washington outside http://washingtonoutside.blogspot.com/
washington's blog http://www.washingtonsblog.com/
blog at wordpress.com. https://wordpress.com/?ref=footer_blog
the baseline scenario https://baselinescenario.com/
blog at wordpress.com. https://wordpress.com/?ref=footer_blog

Zdjęcia

Zdjęcia 6
Zdjęcia bez atrybutu ALT 5
Zdjęcia bez atrybutu TITLE 6
Korzystanie Obraz ALT i TITLE atrybutu dla każdego obrazu.

Zdjęcia bez atrybutu TITLE

https://baselinescenario.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/screen-shot-2017-05-25-at-2-29-31-pm.jpg?w=264&h=300
https://baselinescenario.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/13-a-front-270px.jpg?w=165&h=270
https://baselinescenario.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/paperjacket.png?w=178&h=270
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/i/41w6u96fqnl._sx339_bo1,204,203,200_.jpg
https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&c2=7518284&c3=&c4=&c5=&c6=&c15=&cv=2.0&cj=1
https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript

Zdjęcia bez atrybutu ALT

https://baselinescenario.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/13-a-front-270px.jpg?w=165&h=270
https://baselinescenario.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/paperjacket.png?w=178&h=270
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/i/41w6u96fqnl._sx339_bo1,204,203,200_.jpg
https://sb.scorecardresearch.com/p?c1=2&c2=7518284&c3=&c4=&c5=&c6=&c15=&cv=2.0&cj=1
https://pixel.wp.com/b.gif?v=noscript

Ranking:


Alexa Traffic
Daily Global Rank Trend
Daily Reach (Percent)









Majestic SEO











Text on page:

the baseline scenario what happened to the global economy and what we can do about it skip to content about 13 bankers white house burning read more follow us ← older posts the importance of fairness: a new economic vision for the democratic party posted on june 15, 2017 by james kwak | 19 comments by james kwak a lot has been written recently about the direction of the democratic party. this is what i think. i have been a democrat my entire life. today, the democratic party matters more than ever because it is the only organization currently capable, at least theoretically, of preventing the republicans from turning the united states into a fully-fledged banana republic, ruled by and for a handful of billionaire families and corporate chieftains, with a stagnant economy and pre-modern levels of inequality. yet i cannot find anything to disagree with in senator bernie sanders’s assessment: “the model the democrats have followed for the last 10 to 20 years has been an ultimate failure. that’s just the objective evidence. we are taking on a right-wing extremist party whose agenda is opposed time after time and on issue after issue by the vast majority of the american people. yet we have lost the white house, the u.s. house, the u.s. senate, almost two-thirds of the governors’ chairs and close to 900 legislative seats across this country. how can anyone not conclude that the democratic agenda and approach has been a failure?” a central shortcoming of the party is that, on economic issues, it has nothing to say to people trapped on the wrong side of our country’s growing inequality divide. hillary clinton won the “working class” (household income less than $50,000) vote, but by a much smaller margin than barack obama in 2012 or 2008—despite donald trump’s ardent efforts to alienate african-americans and latinos. some people voted for trump because of racism or misogyny. but clinton was also flattened by trump among voters who feel their financial situation was worse than a year before or who think that life will be worse for the next generation. she lost the electoral college in the “rust belt” states of the upper midwest, whose economies have never fully recovered from the decline of american manufacturing. the democratic party was once the party of working people. so why is it increasingly becoming the party of well-educated, socially tolerant, cosmopolitan city-dwellers? because, in an age of stagnant median incomes and a disintegrating social safety net, democrats have no economic message for the many people who are struggling to make ends meet, to pay for college, to stay in a home, or to save for retirement. continue reading → 19 comments posted in syndication tagged democratic party, economics, economism, politics economism and arbitration clauses posted on may 31, 2017 by james kwak | 10 comments by james kwak as banking scandals go, wells fargo opening millions of new accounts for existing customers so that it could pump up its cross-selling metrics for investors is about as clear-cut as it gets. it’s up there with hsbc telling its employees how to get around u.s. regulations in order to launder money for drug cartels, or traders and treasury officials at several banks conspiring to fix libor. holding wells responsible, however, was a bit trickier. the bank agreed to restitution (i.e, refunding the fees it had collected from its customers for the phony accounts) and a paltry $185 million in fines. when customers sued for damages, however, wells hid behind its mandatory arbitration clauses, which were so broadly written that they even applied to accounts that the customer never intended to exist and that the bank had fraudulently created. wells eventually reached a settlement with the class of plaintiff customers, but the settlement amount was no doubt influenced by the bank’s ability to compel arbitration. the consumer financial protection bureau has proposed to eliminate the wells fargo defense by prohibiting class action waivers—clauses that take away customers’ right to participate in class action lawsuits—in arbitration clauses of financial contracts. (class actions are crucial to deterring and punishing systematic fraud against consumers, because the harm to any single person will not be worth the expense of pursuing a lawsuit; without a class action, no one will sue, and the company will escape unharmed.) continue reading → 10 comments posted in syndication tagged cfpb, economism, law, wells fargo how markets work posted on may 25, 2017 by james kwak | 5 comments by james kwak the congressional budget office’s assessment of the republican health care plan, as passed in the house, is out. the bottom line is that many more people will lack health coverage than under current law—23 million by 2026—even though the bill allows states to relax the essential health benefits package, which should in theory attract younger, healthier people. this is not a surprise. i just want to comment on the role of markets in all of this, which i think is not fully understood. for example, the times article by the very up-to-speed margot sanger-katz explains that the american health care act of 2017 will make markets “dysfunctional.” this is consistent with the rosy view that many people, particularly centrist democrats, have of health care: if we could only get markets to behave properly (correct for market failures, to use the jargon), everything would be great. but that’s not how markets work. continue reading → 5 comments posted in syndication tagged economism, health care, health insurance, trumpcare fees add up posted on may 22, 2017 by james kwak | 5 comments by james kwak public pension funds are having a tough time. on the one hand, the average funding ratio (assets as a percentage of the present value of future obligations) is below 80% because of inadequate contributions by sponsors (states and municipalities) and poor investment returns since the collapse of the technology bubble in 2000. on the other hand, because pensions responded to low returns by shifting more of their money into hedge funds and private equity funds, a larger proportion of their assets is siphoned off as investment fees each year. unlike some people, i am not against hedge funds and private equity funds in principle. i think it’s highly likely that there are people who can beat the market on a sustained basis—particularly if they are people who are especially good with computers—both for theoretical reasons (someone has to be the first person to discover each relevant piece of information or actionable pattern) and empirical reasons (see fama and french 2010, for example). hedge funds have lagged the stock market in recent years, but what critics sometimes overlook is that they are supposed to trail the market in boom periods, because many target a beta of around 0.5. but i am mystified by the fact that, in what is supposed to be a highly competitive and innovative industry, the price of investing in a hedge fund has stayed virtually fixed at 2-and-20 (2% of assets, plus 20% of investment returns) for decades. the consequences of these high prices are added up in the big squeeze, a new report sponsored by the american federation of teachers. because true investment fees are usually not disclosed—fund managers insist that they are confidential and require investors not to divulge them—the report simply quantifies the potential savings from reducing fees from 1.8-and-18 to 0.9-and-9. this may seem arbitrary, but i know anecdotally that some funds, even big ones, are charging something like 1-and-10 even to ordinary investors. since state pension funds are some of the biggest investors that exist, you would think they would be able to negotiate even lower fees. not surprisingly, the numbers involved add up quickly. lower fees over the past five years would have saved the average pension fund included in the study $1.6 billion; to put things in perspective, it would have improved the aggregate funding ratio for these funds by more than two percentage points, which is nothing to sneeze at. the important question is why high fees persist despite the potential market power of big pension funds. there are probably multiple explanations. one is a culture of secrecy, which makes it difficult for any fund to find out what other funds are paying. another is the marketing prowess of fund managers, who are adept at explaining when their fund is unlike any other in the world and therefore merits its high fees. a third is that pension fund managers are playing with other people’s money (in this case, the other people are the fund’s beneficiaries—teachers, firefighters, and other government employees)—and may be more interested in ingratiating themselves with the asset management industry than with getting the best deal they can. (this is even more likely the case for the investment consultants who match pension funds with asset managers.) but in a political climate that makes tax increases on rich fund managers unlikely, state governments could achieve the same results by taking a harder line on investment management fees: requiring public disclosure of all fees or even imposing hard fee caps for pension fund investments. with the amount of money involved, it’s hard to imagine that major pension funds couldn’t find anyone competent to take their money for 0.9-and-9. 5 comments posted in syndication tagged asset management, pension funds, retirement soak the poor, feed the rich posted on march 7, 2017 by james kwak | 21 comments by james kwak after the dangerous clown show that has been the trump white house, it’s comforting to return to some good, old-fashioned conservative policymaking: bashing the poor to cut taxes on the rich. i’m talking, of course, about the republican plan to repeal and replace obamacare. health care financing can sometimes seem like a complicated topic. adverse selection, risk adjustment, blah blah blah. but it’s easy to understand the american health care act or, as it is sure to be known, trumpcare. in the medium term, financing policies have little effect on the price of health care. at most we can hope to “bend the [long-term] cost curve.” so health care policy essentially comes down to a single question: who pays? continue reading → 21 comments posted in commentary, syndication tagged health care, health insurance, obamacare, trumpcare review copies of economism posted on march 5, 2017 by james kwak | 1 comment by james kwak if you teach introductory economics or introductory micro, at either the high school or university level, and you’re interested in possibly using economism in your class, let me know and i’ll send you a (free) review copy. just email me at james.kwak@uconn.edu from your school account, tell me what class you are thinking of assigning the book to, and let me know your shipping address, and i’ll order a copy for you.* quick summary: the central theme of economism is that some of the basic models taught in “economics 101” have acquired disproportionate influence in contemporary society and are routinely and systematically misapplied to important policy questions. the problem is not that introductory models are wrong, but that too many people forget their limitations and believe that their simple conclusions can be reflexively applied to the real world. as paul samuelson said in the first edition of his textbook, the idea that “any interference with free competition by government was almost certain to be injurious … is all that some of our leading citizens remember, 30 years later, of their college course in economics.” in chapters on labor markets, taxes, trade, and other topics, economism first walks through the implications of introductory models before explaining how a richer understanding of economic reality, including empirical research, teaches different and more interesting lessons. if you worry that the typical first-year curriculum produces too many students who think unregulated markets are the answer to every problem, economism may be the antidote you need. in the financial times, martin sandbu wrote, “economics lecturers, take note: include [economism] on your syllabus and set aside ample time to discuss its arguments in class.” the book has also received praise from many economists including ian ayres (yale law school), jared bernstein (former chief economic adviser to vice president joe biden), heather boushey (chief economist, washington center for equitable growth), simon johnson (mit sloan; former chief economist, imf; and my frequent co-author), dani rodrik (harvard), and noah smith (bloomberg view). for more about the book, you can visit economism.net. the atlantic also published an excerpt. (it’s basically the first half of the labor market chapter, on the minimum wage; the second half of that chapter deals with the compensation of very high earners.) and again, email me if you want a review copy. (note: i’m not doing this for the money; i’m doing it to get the book in the hands of as many students as possible. i have donated all of my royalties from 13 bankers, white house burning, and economism to charitable organizations. i can’t anticipate my financial situation for the rest of my life, but i will donate all royalties from economism for at least the next five years.) * the fine print (updated): in the past twelve hours, the large majority of requests i’ve gotten have not actually been from people who teach introductory economics classes, so here are some clarifications: you know how publishers send you review copies of textbooks, hoping that you’ll assign them to your students? this is the same thing. that’s why i ask that you tell me what class you might use the book in. if it isn’t introductory economics or introductory micro, or if you don’t specify a class, i may send you a review copy, but only after seeing how many requests i get from people who are teaching those classes. i’m not actually going to try to check what your teaching schedule is, so this is on the honor system. but please remember that i’m paying for these books, not the publisher. let me know if you prefer hard copy or kindle. if the latter, i need to know the email address of your amazon account. non-u.s. requests: i can’t send hard copies outside the u.s. because i’m ordering the books individually from amazon. (it’s too much work for me to mail them individually.) i can send you a kindle copy. so please send me the email address of your amazon u.s. account; i don’t think the book is for sale from most other amazon subsidiaries, and in any case i’m buying the books with my amazon u.s. account. 1 comment posted in books, syndication tagged economics 101, economism, teaching why is connecticut giving its employees’ money to the asset management industry? posted on january 30, 2017 by james kwak | 4 comments by james kwak in general, the state of connecticut offers pretty good defined contribution retirement plans to its employees. most importantly, it offers several low-cost index funds in institutional share classes. for example, you can invest in the vanguard institutional index fund institutional plus shares, which tracks the s&p 500 for just 2 basis points, or the tiaa-cref small-cap blend index institutional class, which tracks the russell 2000 for just 7 basis points. administrative fees are unbundled, and are only 5 basis points. for no good reason i can discern, however, you can also invest in actively managed stock funds like the jpmorgan mid cap value fund, which costs 80 basis points. as i’ve previously said, i have mixed feelings about target date funds. in principle, they do the reallocation and rebalancing for you, so they could be appropriate for people who want to make one choice and then forget about their investments (which, in many ways, is a good strategy). the hitch is that a target date fund is only as good as the funds inside it. fidelity, for example, puts twenty-five different funds inside one of its target date funds, including thirteen u.s. stock funds, eleven of which appear to be actively managed. this is just a clever way to sneak expensive active management back in through the back door. the connecticut retirement plans do have target date funds, but luckily they use vanguard’s versions, which are made up of index funds and only charge 14–16 bp (as opposed to 77 bp for the fidelity freedom 2040 fund) … until now. as of february, the connecticut defined contribution plans are switching away from vanguard to something called “goalmaker,” which takes your money and spreads it out among the various funds offered by the plan—including those expensive, actively managed funds. for example, if you say you have a moderate risk tolerance and want to retire in 2034, it puts your money in fourteen different funds—including six u.s. stock funds, three of which are actively managed. this is just fake diversification. on one level, it may seem more prudent to have money in both the vanguard s&p index fund and the fidelity vip contrafund portfolio (wow, “vip,” that must be special!). but mutual funds are already diversified—particularly index funds. if you have some reason for thinking that the vip contrafund portfolio will beat the index, then you might choose to invest in it—but, in fact, it’s trailed the s&p 500 over 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. most likely, the people who are currently invested in vanguard target date funds will get shifted into goalmaker portfolios. they will pay several times as much in fees for basically the same thing, except with a little additional risk due to managers’ attempts to beat the market. it’s hard to see how this makes anyone better off—except the asset managers themselves. 4 comments posted in commentary, syndication tagged asset management, investing, retirement savings ← older posts baseline scenario on facebook baseline scenario on facebook simonview baselinescene’s profile on twittersimon on twittermy tweetsour first book our second book search for: james’s new book jamesview jamesykwak’s profile on facebookview jamesykwak’s profile on twitterjames on twittermy tweets recent posts the importance of fairness: a new economic vision for the democratic party economism and arbitration clauses how markets work fees add up soak the poor, feed the rich review copies of economism why is connecticut giving its employees’ money to the asset management industry? the right to have rights economism and economics economism and the law economism and health care conflicts and corruption archives archives select month june 2017 may 2017 march 2017 january 2017 december 2016 november 2016 october 2016 september 2016 august 2016 july 2016 june 2016 may 2016 april 2016 march 2016 february 2016 january 2016 december 2015 november 2015 october 2015 september 2015 august 2015 july 2015 june 2015 may 2015 april 2015 february 2015 january 2015 december 2014 november 2014 october 2014 september 2014 july 2014 june 2014 may 2014 april 2014 march 2014 february 2014 january 2014 december 2013 november 2013 october 2013 september 2013 august 2013 july 2013 june 2013 may 2013 april 2013 march 2013 february 2013 january 2013 december 2012 november 2012 october 2012 september 2012 august 2012 july 2012 june 2012 may 2012 april 2012 march 2012 february 2012 january 2012 december 2011 november 2011 october 2011 september 2011 august 2011 july 2011 june 2011 may 2011 april 2011 march 2011 february 2011 january 2011 december 2010 november 2010 october 2010 september 2010 august 2010 july 2010 june 2010 may 2010 april 2010 march 2010 february 2010 january 2010 december 2009 november 2009 october 2009 september 2009 august 2009 july 2009 june 2009 may 2009 april 2009 march 2009 february 2009 january 2009 december 2008 november 2008 october 2008 september 2008 links angry bear brad delong calculated risk econacademics.org econbrowser econlog economic principals economicsuk economist’s view economists’ forum at financial times ezra klein felix salmon free exchange (the economist) imfdirect interfluidity macroadvisers marginal revolution mit sloan experts money supply (ft) naked capitalism new deal 2.0 nouriel roubini npr planet money oecd insights oilprice.com paul krugman paul solman peterson institute: crisis watch rational irrationality real time economics (wsj) rortybomb sense on cents the epicurean dealmaker the pareto commons tobin project triplecrisis washington outside washington's blog all contents are copyright of the authors. the baseline scenario is a trademark of the authors. blog at wordpress.com. the baseline scenario blog at wordpress.com. post to cancel


Here you find all texts from your page as Google (googlebot) and others search engines seen it.

Words density analysis:

Numbers of all words: 3303

One word

Two words phrases

Three words phrases

the - 6.99% (231)
and - 2.12% (70)
for - 1.7% (56)
are - 1.54% (51)
fund - 1.51% (50)
that - 1.15% (38)
you - 1.12% (37)
age - 0.91% (30)
funds - 0.91% (30)
can - 0.82% (27)
all - 0.79% (26)
one - 0.79% (26)
use - 0.73% (24)
have - 0.61% (20)
not - 0.61% (20)
james - 0.61% (20)
any - 0.61% (20)
our - 0.58% (19)
act - 0.58% (19)
economism - 0.58% (19)
but - 0.58% (19)
fee - 0.58% (19)
post - 0.54% (18)
people - 0.54% (18)
invest - 0.54% (18)
economic - 0.54% (18)
book - 0.54% (18)
kwak - 0.51% (17)
may - 0.51% (17)
comment - 0.51% (17)
get - 0.48% (16)
market - 0.48% (16)
with - 0.48% (16)
care - 0.45% (15)
health - 0.45% (15)
class - 0.45% (15)
his - 0.45% (15)
who - 0.45% (15)
out - 0.45% (15)
from - 0.42% (14)
fees - 0.42% (14)
this - 0.42% (14)
posted - 0.42% (14)
some - 0.42% (14)
how - 0.39% (13)
its - 0.39% (13)
money - 0.39% (13)
set - 0.39% (13)
2012 - 0.39% (13)
which - 0.39% (13)
2010 - 0.39% (13)
2011 - 0.36% (12)
view - 0.36% (12)
2009 - 0.36% (12)
ever - 0.36% (12)
comments - 0.36% (12)
2016 - 0.36% (12)
2013 - 0.36% (12)
2017 - 0.36% (12)
time - 0.33% (11)
each - 0.33% (11)
economics - 0.33% (11)
2014 - 0.33% (11)
democrat - 0.33% (11)
ratio - 0.33% (11)
2015 - 0.33% (11)
asset - 0.3% (10)
your - 0.3% (10)
june - 0.3% (10)
will - 0.3% (10)
even - 0.3% (10)
pension - 0.3% (10)
they - 0.3% (10)
march - 0.3% (10)
many - 0.3% (10)
more - 0.3% (10)
party - 0.3% (10)
over - 0.3% (10)
january - 0.3% (10)
was - 0.27% (9)
low - 0.27% (9)
their - 0.27% (9)
other - 0.27% (9)
year - 0.27% (9)
think - 0.27% (9)
december - 0.27% (9)
because - 0.27% (9)
september - 0.27% (9)
it’s - 0.27% (9)
has - 0.27% (9)
what - 0.27% (9)
february - 0.27% (9)
u.s. - 0.27% (9)
october - 0.27% (9)
november - 0.27% (9)
make - 0.27% (9)
like - 0.27% (9)
line - 0.27% (9)
teach - 0.24% (8)
plan - 0.24% (8)
bit - 0.24% (8)
try - 0.24% (8)
investment - 0.24% (8)
add - 0.24% (8)
markets - 0.24% (8)
july - 0.24% (8)
just - 0.24% (8)
about - 0.24% (8)
april - 0.24% (8)
democratic - 0.21% (7)
know - 0.21% (7)
funds, - 0.21% (7)
i’m - 0.21% (7)
tagged - 0.21% (7)
than - 0.21% (7)
state - 0.21% (7)
august - 0.21% (7)
trump - 0.21% (7)
cut - 0.21% (7)
syndication - 0.21% (7)
off - 0.21% (7)
read - 0.21% (7)
side - 0.21% (7)
high - 0.21% (7)
copy - 0.21% (7)
bank - 0.21% (7)
house - 0.21% (7)
management - 0.21% (7)
index - 0.21% (7)
managers - 0.21% (7)
introductory - 0.21% (7)
baseline - 0.18% (6)
only - 0.18% (6)
good - 0.18% (6)
hard - 0.18% (6)
see - 0.18% (6)
new - 0.18% (6)
been - 0.18% (6)
customer - 0.18% (6)
cap - 0.18% (6)
send - 0.18% (6)
work - 0.18% (6)
american - 0.18% (6)
them - 0.18% (6)
law - 0.18% (6)
financial - 0.18% (6)
first - 0.18% (6)
ample - 0.18% (6)
times - 0.18% (6)
target - 0.18% (6)
review - 0.18% (6)
years - 0.18% (6)
date - 0.18% (6)
public - 0.18% (6)
retire - 0.18% (6)
most - 0.18% (6)
wells - 0.18% (6)
action - 0.15% (5)
right - 0.15% (5)
under - 0.15% (5)
able - 0.15% (5)
including - 0.15% (5)
mail - 0.15% (5)
connecticut - 0.15% (5)
books - 0.15% (5)
amazon - 0.15% (5)
here - 0.15% (5)
vanguard - 0.15% (5)
basis - 0.15% (5)
scenario - 0.15% (5)
2008 - 0.15% (5)
into - 0.15% (5)
active - 0.15% (5)
rest - 0.15% (5)
would - 0.15% (5)
could - 0.15% (5)
retirement - 0.15% (5)
employees - 0.15% (5)
rich - 0.15% (5)
customers - 0.15% (5)
clauses - 0.15% (5)
why - 0.15% (5)
she - 0.15% (5)
pay - 0.15% (5)
arbitration - 0.15% (5)
poor - 0.12% (4)
hedge - 0.12% (4)
likely - 0.12% (4)
too - 0.12% (4)
institutional - 0.12% (4)
fine - 0.12% (4)
chief - 0.12% (4)
free - 0.12% (4)
reason - 0.12% (4)
actively - 0.12% (4)
mit - 0.12% (4)
way - 0.12% (4)
managed - 0.12% (4)
real - 0.12% (4)
email - 0.12% (4)
funds. - 0.12% (4)
put - 0.12% (4)
big - 0.12% (4)
industry - 0.12% (4)
deal - 0.12% (4)
copies - 0.12% (4)
risk - 0.12% (4)
return - 0.12% (4)
stock - 0.12% (4)
price - 0.12% (4)
after - 0.12% (4)
states - 0.12% (4)
also - 0.12% (4)
very - 0.12% (4)
white - 0.12% (4)
want - 0.12% (4)
example, - 0.12% (4)
continue - 0.12% (4)
there - 0.12% (4)
- 0.12% (4)
take - 0.12% (4)
model - 0.12% (4)
economism, - 0.12% (4)
investors - 0.12% (4)
reading - 0.12% (4)
house, - 0.12% (4)
portfolio - 0.09% (3)
vip - 0.09% (3)
question - 0.09% (3)
or, - 0.09% (3)
important - 0.09% (3)
five - 0.09% (3)
obama - 0.09% (3)
find - 0.09% (3)
students - 0.09% (3)
exist - 0.09% (3)
anyone - 0.09% (3)
applied - 0.09% (3)
makes - 0.09% (3)
people. - 0.09% (3)
paul - 0.09% (3)
same - 0.09% (3)
order - 0.09% (3)
tax - 0.09% (3)
that’s - 0.09% (3)
major - 0.09% (3)
fargo - 0.09% (3)
accounts - 0.09% (3)
basic - 0.09% (3)
case - 0.09% (3)
several - 0.09% (3)
government - 0.09% (3)
funding - 0.09% (3)
fidelity - 0.09% (3)
contribution - 0.09% (3)
plans - 0.09% (3)
blah - 0.09% (3)
however, - 0.09% (3)
democrats - 0.09% (3)
million - 0.09% (3)
care. - 0.09% (3)
unlike - 0.09% (3)
assets - 0.09% (3)
teaching - 0.09% (3)
copy. - 0.09% (3)
beat - 0.09% (3)
chapter - 0.09% (3)
bill - 0.09% (3)
fully - 0.09% (3)
s&p - 0.09% (3)
school - 0.09% (3)
particularly - 0.09% (3)
class, - 0.09% (3)
let - 0.09% (3)
requests - 0.09% (3)
trumpcare - 0.09% (3)
returns - 0.09% (3)
care, - 0.09% (3)
college - 0.09% (3)
blog - 0.09% (3)
life - 0.09% (3)
current - 0.09% (3)
address - 0.09% (3)
policy - 0.09% (3)
books, - 0.09% (3)
cost - 0.09% (3)
much - 0.09% (3)
profile - 0.09% (3)
models - 0.09% (3)
seem - 0.09% (3)
facebook - 0.09% (3)
these - 0.09% (3)
tell - 0.09% (3)
issue - 0.09% (3)
posts - 0.09% (3)
recent - 0.09% (3)
washington - 0.09% (3)
republican - 0.09% (3)
fact - 0.09% (3)
simon - 0.09% (3)
points. - 0.09% (3)
share - 0.06% (2)
lost - 0.06% (2)
kindle - 0.06% (2)
nothing - 0.06% (2)
classes. - 0.06% (2)
is, - 0.06% (2)
please - 0.06% (2)
remember - 0.06% (2)
those - 0.06% (2)
don’t - 0.06% (2)
wrong - 0.06% (2)
actually - 0.06% (2)
assign - 0.06% (2)
say - 0.06% (2)
might - 0.06% (2)
paying - 0.06% (2)
need - 0.06% (2)
employees’ - 0.06% (2)
giving - 0.06% (2)
industry? - 0.06% (2)
almost - 0.06% (2)
offers - 0.06% (2)
close - 0.06% (2)
individually - 0.06% (2)
that, - 0.06% (2)
account. - 0.06% (2)
outside - 0.06% (2)
central - 0.06% (2)
defined - 0.06% (2)
managed. - 0.06% (2)
organization - 0.06% (2)
currently - 0.06% (2)
written - 0.06% (2)
vision - 0.06% (2)
fairness: - 0.06% (2)
least - 0.06% (2)
stagnant - 0.06% (2)
jamesykwak’s - 0.06% (2)
tweets - 0.06% (2)
archives - 0.06% (2)
select - 0.06% (2)
importance - 0.06% (2)
older - 0.06% (2)
rational - 0.06% (2)
crisis - 0.06% (2)
authors. - 0.06% (2)
wordpress.com. - 0.06% (2)
economy - 0.06% (2)
sloan - 0.06% (2)
content - 0.06% (2)
- 0.06% (2)
follow - 0.06% (2)
burning - 0.06% (2)
bankers - 0.06% (2)
search - 0.06% (2)
twittermy - 0.06% (2)
taking - 0.06% (2)
whose - 0.06% (2)
then - 0.06% (2)
investments - 0.06% (2)
inside - 0.06% (2)
mid - 0.06% (2)
agenda - 0.06% (2)
tracks - 0.06% (2)
500 - 0.06% (2)
2000 - 0.06% (2)
opposed - 0.06% (2)
puts - 0.06% (2)
i’ve - 0.06% (2)
likely, - 0.06% (2)
years. - 0.06% (2)
goalmaker - 0.06% (2)
except - 0.06% (2)
yet - 0.06% (2)
contrafund - 0.06% (2)
both - 0.06% (2)
expensive - 0.06% (2)
back - 0.06% (2)
through - 0.06% (2)
(as - 0.06% (2)
majority - 0.06% (2)
among - 0.06% (2)
fees. - 0.06% (2)
lower - 0.06% (2)
involved - 0.06% (2)
past - 0.06% (2)
two - 0.06% (2)
settlement - 0.06% (2)
amount - 0.06% (2)
0.9-and-9. - 0.06% (2)
savings - 0.06% (2)
away - 0.06% (2)
something - 0.06% (2)
consumer - 0.06% (2)
points, - 0.06% (2)
at. - 0.06% (2)
had - 0.06% (2)
themselves - 0.06% (2)
fix - 0.06% (2)
around - 0.06% (2)
management, - 0.06% (2)
interested - 0.06% (2)
third - 0.06% (2)
despite - 0.06% (2)
when - 0.06% (2)
explaining - 0.06% (2)
world - 0.06% (2)
potential - 0.06% (2)
against - 0.06% (2)
equity - 0.06% (2)
private - 0.06% (2)
people, - 0.06% (2)
highly - 0.06% (2)
theoretical - 0.06% (2)
hand, - 0.06% (2)
insurance, - 0.06% (2)
percentage - 0.06% (2)
value - 0.06% (2)
average - 0.06% (2)
since - 0.06% (2)
reasons - 0.06% (2)
essential - 0.06% (2)
plus - 0.06% (2)
person - 0.06% (2)
single - 0.06% (2)
harm - 0.06% (2)
report - 0.06% (2)
investing - 0.06% (2)
assessment - 0.06% (2)
empirical - 0.06% (2)
sometimes - 0.06% (2)
supposed - 0.06% (2)
trail - 0.06% (2)
soak - 0.06% (2)
poor, - 0.06% (2)
ian - 0.06% (2)
margin - 0.06% (2)
less - 0.06% (2)
income - 0.06% (2)
adviser - 0.06% (2)
include - 0.06% (2)
note: - 0.06% (2)
- 0.06% (2)
said - 0.06% (2)
course - 0.06% (2)
labor - 0.06% (2)
every - 0.06% (2)
economist, - 0.06% (2)
former - 0.06% (2)
can’t - 0.06% (2)
royalties - 0.06% (2)
clinton - 0.06% (2)
donate - 0.06% (2)
inequality - 0.06% (2)
doing - 0.06% (2)
second - 0.06% (2)
book, - 0.06% (2)
(it’s - 0.06% (2)
basically - 0.06% (2)
half - 0.06% (2)
feel - 0.06% (2)
forget - 0.06% (2)
comes - 0.06% (2)
save - 0.06% (2)
commentary, - 0.06% (2)
stay - 0.06% (2)
social - 0.06% (2)
little - 0.06% (2)
sure - 0.06% (2)
feed - 0.06% (2)
taxes - 0.06% (2)
financing - 0.06% (2)
understand - 0.06% (2)
working - 0.06% (2)
never - 0.06% (2)
quick - 0.06% (2)
worse - 0.06% (2)
“economics - 0.06% (2)
problem - 0.06% (2)
situation - 0.06% (2)
before - 0.06% (2)
thinking - 0.06% (2)
micro, - 0.06% (2)
level, - 0.06% (2)
i’ll - 0.06% (2)
next - 0.06% (2)
large - 0.06% (2)
of the - 0.51% (17)
james kwak - 0.42% (14)
by james - 0.42% (14)
for the - 0.39% (13)
in the - 0.36% (12)
that the - 0.33% (11)
health care - 0.3% (10)
the book - 0.24% (8)
on the - 0.24% (8)
this is - 0.24% (8)
posted in - 0.21% (7)
if you - 0.21% (7)
people who - 0.21% (7)
kwak | - 0.21% (7)
syndication tagged - 0.21% (7)
2017 by - 0.21% (7)
posted on - 0.21% (7)
democratic party - 0.18% (6)
comments posted - 0.18% (6)
and the - 0.18% (6)
by the - 0.18% (6)
pension funds - 0.18% (6)
the democratic - 0.18% (6)
comments by - 0.18% (6)
is that - 0.18% (6)
index fund - 0.15% (5)
asset management - 0.15% (5)
who are - 0.15% (5)
date fund - 0.15% (5)
target date - 0.15% (5)
with the - 0.15% (5)
economism and - 0.15% (5)
fund managers - 0.12% (4)
actively managed - 0.12% (4)
money in - 0.12% (4)
class action - 0.12% (4)
reading → - 0.12% (4)
the american - 0.12% (4)
funds are - 0.12% (4)
is not - 0.12% (4)
send you - 0.12% (4)
the asset - 0.12% (4)
5 comments - 0.12% (4)
for example, - 0.12% (4)
about the - 0.12% (4)
the market - 0.12% (4)
in syndication - 0.12% (4)
continue reading - 0.12% (4)
funds in - 0.12% (4)
has been - 0.12% (4)
white house - 0.12% (4)
arbitration clauses - 0.12% (4)
1 comment - 0.12% (4)
hedge fund - 0.12% (4)
its employees - 0.12% (4)
to the - 0.12% (4)
of their - 0.09% (3)
that some - 0.09% (3)
introductory economics - 0.09% (3)
they are - 0.09% (3)
here are - 0.09% (3)
some of - 0.09% (3)
the first - 0.09% (3)
review copies - 0.09% (3)
let me - 0.09% (3)
the same - 0.09% (3)
i think - 0.09% (3)
the rich - 0.09% (3)
the republican - 0.09% (3)
invest in - 0.09% (3)
me know - 0.09% (3)
stock funds - 0.09% (3)
basis points. - 0.09% (3)
the baseline - 0.09% (3)
applied to - 0.09% (3)
many people - 0.09% (3)
add up - 0.09% (3)
funds and - 0.09% (3)
markets work - 0.09% (3)
on may - 0.09% (3)
use the - 0.09% (3)
is the - 0.09% (3)
with a - 0.09% (3)
how markets - 0.09% (3)
that they - 0.09% (3)
the u.s. - 0.09% (3)
index funds - 0.09% (3)
the party - 0.09% (3)
wells fargo - 0.09% (3)
been a - 0.09% (3)
want to - 0.09% (3)
copies of - 0.09% (3)
i have - 0.09% (3)
hedge funds - 0.09% (3)
address of - 0.06% (2)
the email - 0.06% (2)
the authors. - 0.06% (2)
your amazon - 0.06% (2)
at wordpress.com. - 0.06% (2)
fairness: a - 0.06% (2)
new economic - 0.06% (2)
think the - 0.06% (2)
from people - 0.06% (2)
vision for - 0.06% (2)
financial times - 0.06% (2)
is connecticut - 0.06% (2)
class you - 0.06% (2)
or introductory - 0.06% (2)
the poor, - 0.06% (2)
me what - 0.06% (2)
feed the - 0.06% (2)
not actually - 0.06% (2)
email address - 0.06% (2)
if the - 0.06% (2)
and arbitration - 0.06% (2)
of your - 0.06% (2)
defined contribution - 0.06% (2)
the next - 0.06% (2)
date funds, - 0.06% (2)
may seem - 0.06% (2)
to have - 0.06% (2)
the s&p - 0.06% (2)
contrafund portfolio - 0.06% (2)
u.s. stock - 0.06% (2)
you have - 0.06% (2)
the connecticut - 0.06% (2)
your money - 0.06% (2)
is just - 0.06% (2)
managed. this - 0.06% (2)
of which - 0.06% (2)
funds inside - 0.06% (2)
commentary, syndication - 0.06% (2)
posts the - 0.06% (2)
retirement plans - 0.06% (2)
4 comments - 0.06% (2)
importance of - 0.06% (2)
employees’ money - 0.06% (2)
jamesykwak’s profile - 0.06% (2)
on twittermy - 0.06% (2)
for just - 0.06% (2)
← older - 0.06% (2)
s&p 500 - 0.06% (2)
scenario on - 0.06% (2)
tracks the - 0.06% (2)
giving its - 0.06% (2)
poor, feed - 0.06% (2)
because of - 0.06% (2)
their money - 0.06% (2)
private equity - 0.06% (2)
funding ratio - 0.06% (2)
fees add - 0.06% (2)
which i - 0.06% (2)
would be - 0.06% (2)
care, health - 0.06% (2)
and private - 0.06% (2)
equity funds - 0.06% (2)
the price - 0.06% (2)
the big - 0.06% (2)
fees are - 0.06% (2)
market in - 0.06% (2)
be the - 0.06% (2)
there are - 0.06% (2)
are people - 0.06% (2)
that many - 0.06% (2)
right to - 0.06% (2)
of fairness: - 0.06% (2)
economic vision - 0.06% (2)
at least - 0.06% (2)
the importance - 0.06% (2)
older posts - 0.06% (2)
economy and - 0.06% (2)
13 bankers - 0.06% (2)
democrats have - 0.06% (2)
house, the - 0.06% (2)
party of - 0.06% (2)
to make - 0.06% (2)
money for - 0.06% (2)
financial situation - 0.06% (2)
some people - 0.06% (2)
nothing to - 0.06% (2)
of our - 0.06% (2)
the potential - 0.06% (2)
the past - 0.06% (2)
email me - 0.06% (2)
tell me - 0.06% (2)
what class - 0.06% (2)
introductory micro, - 0.06% (2)
economics or - 0.06% (2)
of economism - 0.06% (2)
teach introductory - 0.06% (2)
the real - 0.06% (2)
too many - 0.06% (2)
i’m not - 0.06% (2)
to get - 0.06% (2)
all of - 0.06% (2)
a review - 0.06% (2)
labor market - 0.06% (2)
former chief - 0.06% (2)
basically the - 0.06% (2)
health insurance, - 0.06% (2)
health care, - 0.06% (2)
other people - 0.06% (2)
are the - 0.06% (2)
interested in - 0.06% (2)
more than - 0.06% (2)
for these - 0.06% (2)
five years - 0.06% (2)
would have - 0.06% (2)
it’s hard - 0.06% (2)
tagged asset - 0.06% (2)
price of - 0.06% (2)
we can - 0.06% (2)
in commentary, - 0.06% (2)
like a - 0.06% (2)
to some - 0.06% (2)
soak the - 0.06% (2)
white house, - 0.06% (2)
i can’t - 0.06% (2)
by james kwak - 0.42% (14)
james kwak | - 0.21% (7)
2017 by james - 0.21% (7)
comments posted in - 0.18% (6)
comments by james - 0.18% (6)
target date fund - 0.15% (5)
in syndication tagged - 0.12% (4)
continue reading → - 0.12% (4)
posted in syndication - 0.12% (4)
5, 2017 by - 0.09% (3)
asset management industry - 0.09% (3)
how markets work - 0.09% (3)
the baseline scenario - 0.09% (3)
posted on may - 0.09% (3)
review copies of - 0.09% (3)
the asset management - 0.09% (3)
what class you - 0.06% (2)
economics or introductory - 0.06% (2)
employees’ money to - 0.06% (2)
connecticut giving its - 0.06% (2)
address of your - 0.06% (2)
from people who - 0.06% (2)
the s&p 500 - 0.06% (2)
soak the poor, - 0.06% (2)
feed the rich - 0.06% (2)
of the authors. - 0.06% (2)
blog at wordpress.com. - 0.06% (2)
on twittermy tweets - 0.06% (2)
scenario on facebook - 0.06% (2)
u.s. stock funds, - 0.06% (2)
actively managed. this - 0.06% (2)
managed. this is - 0.06% (2)
vip contrafund portfolio - 0.06% (2)
which tracks the - 0.06% (2)
poor, feed the - 0.06% (2)
american health care - 0.06% (2)
5 comments posted - 0.06% (2)
fees add up - 0.06% (2)
pension funds are - 0.06% (2)
5 comments by - 0.06% (2)
and arbitration clauses - 0.06% (2)
importance of fairness: - 0.06% (2)
a new economic - 0.06% (2)
vision for the - 0.06% (2)
the party of - 0.06% (2)
funds and private - 0.06% (2)
hedge funds and - 0.06% (2)
the american health - 0.06% (2)
posted in commentary, - 0.06% (2)
care, health insurance, - 0.06% (2)
copies of economism - 0.06% (2)
syndication tagged asset - 0.06% (2)
it’s hard to - 0.06% (2)
private equity funds - 0.06% (2)
are people who - 0.06% (2)
the price of - 0.06% (2)
posted on march - 0.06% (2)

Here you can find chart of all your popular one, two and three word phrases. Google and others search engines means your page is about words you use frequently.

Copyright © 2015-2016 hupso.pl. All rights reserved. FB | +G | Twitter

Hupso.pl jest serwisem internetowym, w którym jednym kliknieciem możesz szybko i łatwo sprawdź stronę www pod kątem SEO. Oferujemy darmowe pozycjonowanie stron internetowych oraz wycena domen i stron internetowych. Prowadzimy ranking polskich stron internetowych oraz ranking stron alexa.