Economic Theory

A monopolist offers personalized prices to consumers with unit demand, heterogeneous values, and idiosyncratic costs, who differ in a protected characteristic, such as race or gender. The seller is subject to a non-discrimination constraint: consumers with the same cost, but different characteristics must face identical prices. Such constraints arise in regulated markets like credit or insurance. The setting reduces to an optimal transport, and we characterize the optimal pricing rule. Under this rule, consumers may retain surplus, and either group may benefit. Strengthening the constraint to cover transaction prices redistributes surplus, harming the low-value group and benefiting the high-value group.

This paper examines how high school specialization shapes college investment decisions and their subsequent returns through dynamic complementarities. Using Swedish administrative data, we estimate a dynamic Roy model that accounts for selection on multidimensional skills, family background, prior investments, and unobserved heterogeneity. We identify the model using rich skill measures and quasi-experimental variation in program popularity. For marginal students, STEM specialization in high school increases wages by 9%, with more than half this return attributed to dynamic complementarities that enhance the productivity of subsequent college investments. Consequently, we find that counterfactual policies encouraging high school STEM specialization generate twice the returns of equivalent college-level interventions. These findings demonstrate how the timing of specialized human capital investments matters during adolescence, with important implications for education policies that encourage or restrict specialization.

The recent artificial intelligence (AI) boom covers a period of rapid innovation and wide adoption of AI intelligence technologies across diverse industries. These developments have fueled an unprecedented frenzy in the Nasdaq, with AI-focused companies experiencing soaring stock prices that raise concerns about speculative bubbles and real-economy consequences. Against this background the present study investigates the formation of speculative bubbles in the Nasdaq stock market with a specific focus on the so-called ‘Magnificent Seven’ (Mag-7) individual stocks during the AI boom, spanning the period January 2017 to January 2025. We apply the real time PSY bubble detection methodology of Phillips et al. (2015a,b), while controlling for market and industry factors for individual stocks. Confidence intervals to assess the degree of speculative behavior in asset price dynamics are calculated using the near-unit root approach of Phillips (2023). The findings reveal the presence of speculative bubbles in the Nasdaq stock market and across all Mag-7 stocks. Nvidia and Microsoft experience the longest speculative periods over January 2017 – December 2021, while Nvidia and Tesla show the fastest rates of explosive behavior. Speculative bubbles persist in the market and in six of the seven stocks (excluding Apple) from December 2022 to January 2025. Near-unit-root inference indicates mildly explosive dynamics for Nvidia and Tesla (2017–2021) and local-to-unity near explosive behavior for all assets in both periods.

We explore conclusions a person draws from observing society when he allows for the possibility that individuals' outcomes are affected by group-level discrimination. Injecting a single non-classical assumption, that the agent is overconfident about himself, we explain key observed patterns in social beliefs, and make a number of additional predictions. First, the agent believes in discrimination against any group he is in more than an outsider does, capturing widely observed self-centered views of discrimination. Second, the more group memberships the agent shares with an individual, the more positively he evaluates the individual. This explains one of the most basic facts about social judgments, in-group bias, as well as "legitimizing myths" that justify an arbitrary social hierarchy through the perceived superiority of the privileged group. Third, biases are sensitive to how the agent divides society into groups when evaluating outcomes. This provides a reason why some ethnically charged questions should not be asked, as well as a potential channel for why nation-building policies might be effective. Fourth, giving the agent more accurate information about himself increases all his biases. Fifth, the agent is prone to substitute biases, implying that the introduction of a new outsider group to focus on creates biases against the new group but lowers biases vis a vis other groups. Sixth, there is a tendency for the agent to agree more with those in the same groups. As a microfoundation for our model, we provide an explanation for why an overconfident agent might allow for potential discrimination in evaluating outcomes, even when he initially did not conceive of this possibility.