$1.5 million Nobel economics prize

While submerging myself on economic theories and various Investing methods to acomplish my goal of a Million Euros in less than 5 years I just find out that two Americans and a British-Cypriot economist won the 2010 Nobel economics prize, for developing a theory that helps explain how many people can remain unemployed despite a large number of job vacancies.

Federal Reserve board nominee Peter Diamond was honored along with Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides with the 10 million Swedish kronor ($1.4 million) prize for their analysis of the obstacles that prevent buyers and sellers from efficiently pairing up in markets.

Diamond — a former mentor to current Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke — analyzed the foundations of so-called search markets, while Mortensen and Pissarides expanded the theory and applied it to the labor market.

Their work, dating back to the 1970s and '80s, sheds light on why the classical view of markets, in which prices are set so that buyers and sellers always find each other and all resources are fully utilized, doesn't always apply to the real world as we already knew.

One example is the housing market, where buyers can struggle to find new homes even though there are a number of unsold properties available.

Another is the labor market. Because searching for jobs takes time and resources, it creates friction in the job market, helping explain why there are both job vacancies and unemployment simultaneously.

The laureates' models tries to help us understand the ways in which unemployment, job vacancies and wages are affected by regulation and economic policy,.But it seems that we already knew that...

Their work resulted in the so-called Diamond-Mortensen-Pissarides model, a frequently used tool to estimate how unemployment benefits, interest rates, the efficiency of employment agencies and other factors can affect the labor market.

"One conclusion is that more generous unemployment benefits give rise to higher unemployment and longer search times," a clear example of that phenomena could be analized in Finland.

Diamond, 70, is an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and an authority on Social Security, pensions and taxation.

President Barack Obama nominated Diamond to become a member of the Federal Reserve, but the Senate failed to approve his nomination before lawmakers left to campaign for the midterm congressional elections.

Senate Republicans have objected to what they see as Diamond's limited experience in dissecting the inner workings of the national economy.

Bernanke was one of Diamond's students at MIT. When Bernanke turned in his doctoral dissertation in 1979, one of the people he thanked was Diamond for being generous with his time and reading and discussing Bernanke's work.

Diamond said the U.S. stimulus spending last year helped prevent much higher unemployment, and a second round would also be beneficial.

Pissarides, a 62-year-old professor of economics and social sciences at the London School of Economics, was the first Nobel winner with Cypriot citizenship.

Speaking from his north London home, Pissarides told The Associated Press the announcement came as "a complete surprise" though his work had already helped shape thinking on both sides of the Atlantic.

For example, the New Deal for Young People, a British government initiative aimed at getting 18-24-year-olds back on the job market after long spells of unemployment, "is very much based on our work," he said.

"One of the key things we found is that it is important to make sure that people do not stay unemployed too long so they don't lose their feel for the labor force," Pissarides told reporters in London. "The ways of dealing with this need not be expensive training — it could be as simple as providing work experience."now I ask myself is this a real major discovery or just common sense?

Mortensen, 71, is an economics professor at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. He is
currently a visiting professor at the University of Aarhus in the neightbour country: Denmark,

Mortensen told AP he was asked not to share the news until the announcement in Stockholm 30 minutes later.

Diamond wrote a paper in the early 1980s that found that unemployment compensation can lead to better job matches. Workers "become more selective in the jobs they accept" because of the employment aid. And, that makes for better matches and increases efficiency, he found.

He told a Senate committee during his nomination hearing in July that a central theme of his research has been how the economy deals with risks that affect both individuals, and the entire economy.

"In all my central research areas, I have thought about and written about the risks in the economy and how markets and government can combine to make the economy function better for individuals," he said in that hearing.

The economics jury was the last of the Nobel committees to announce 2010 winners.

Last week, British professor Robert Edwards won the medicine prize for research that led to the first test tube baby. Russian-born scientists Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov shared the physics prize for groundbreaking experiments with graphene, the strongest and thinnest material known to mankind.

The chemistry award went to Richard Heck and Japanese researchers Ei-ichi Negishi and Akira Suzuki for designing techniques to bind together carbon atoms.

Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa won the literature prize( a victory for L-A ) and the imprisoned "Chinese democracy "(Axl was visionary :) campaigner Liu Xiaobo was named the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

The awards are always handed out on Dec. 10, the anniversary of Nobel's death in 1896.

Some Excerpts from the citation awarding the 2010 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences to Americans Peter Diamond and Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides, a British and Cypriot citizen.

___

"Why are so many people unemployed at the same time that there are a large number of job openings? How can economic policy affect unemployment? This year's Laureates have developed a theory which can be used to answer these questions. This theory is also applicable to markets other than the labor market."

___

"On many markets, buyers and sellers do not always make contact with one another immediately. This concerns, for example, employers who are looking for employees and workers who are trying to find jobs. Since the search process requires time and resources, it creates frictions in the market. On such search markets, the demands of some buyers will not be met, while some sellers cannot sell as much as they would wish. Simultaneously, there are both job vacancies and unemployment on the labor market."

___

"This year's three Laureates have formulated a theoretical framework for search markets. Peter Diamond has analyzed the foundations of search markets. Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides have expanded the theory and have applied it to the labor market. The Laureates' models help us understand the ways in which unemployment, job vacancies, and wages are affected by regulation and economic policy. This may refer to benefit levels in unemployment insurance or rules in regard to hiring and firing. One conclusion is that more generous unemployment benefits give rise to higher unemployment and longer search times."

___

"Search theory has been applied to many other areas in addition to the labor market. This includes, in particular, the housing market. The number of homes for sale varies over time, as does the time it takes for a house to find a buyer and the parties to agree on the price. Search theory has also been used to study questions related to monetary theory, public economics, financial economics, regional economics, and family economics."

So let´s keep investing and finding out what this theory is all about so far it seems to me that the Nobel Commitee is just running out of talent and common sense or maybe is just me that while trying to aproach my difficult task of one Million in less than 5 years, I get more and more critical of all and everything...

Anyway keep the ball rolling, some late picks to keep at least until June 2011 are: Mreal and Marimekko. Keep in touch remember lets make it happen.

How to change your job and stay on the game

Recently I just had a baby girl, she gave me the energy to change the job I had held for three years and 7 months, I have given the topic of job-changing a great deal of thought. However bad a job may be and however much you dread Monday mornings, making the decision to leave the job — especially one you have held for some years — is never an easy process.

There's a large degree of comfort in your current responsibilities and the company you're familiar with. Part of your brain knows you're capable of more, but another part is fraught with self-doubt and wakes you from sleep at 2am in a cold sweat, beaming an image of you in your job frozen by ignorance, out of your depth, and facing termination.

So how do you know when it's time to go? Based on my recent experience, here are some indicators that it's time to make the change.

You know you aren't performing to the best of your ability
We all go through slumps, bad days, even bad weeks when we just don't care, don't give it our best... but what if that week turns into months? Specially if you are aiming at Millions just like me, If you just don't have what it takes to give it your best, something needs to change. This is a common sign of burnout or of being overworked, under-worked, under-challenged or out of your depth. I wanted to grab the moon but I got into the rutine.

If lack of motivation is the only issue, it may be possible to effect change within your current company by requesting different responsibilities, more training or another position. But if none of these options is available, it's time to update your resume.

You can't picture your future with your current company
Do you remember those questions the last time you were interviewed: "Where do you see yourself in three years? Five years? Ten?" Perhaps it's time to ask yourself those questions again. But this time ask, "Do I see myself HERE in three years? Five years? Ten?" If the answer to any of these questions is no, what is your plan? Where do you want to go? When were you planning to make your move?

As much as we'd all like to simply wake up one day to find ourselves in the perfect job, the chance of it happening is probably slightly slimmer than becoming a Millionaire in less than 5 years. If you know that you want to be working somewhere else at some point in the future, it's never too soon to make a plan. Now that I finally changed my job I regret not doing it before.

You take inventory of your job's pros and cons... and the cons win
If you're having a hard time deciding whether to change jobs, try this simple exercise. Create a document with two lists — things you like about your current job, and things you dislike. Next, apply a weighting to the items. This can be as simple as a value from one to 10 to rate the importance of each factor. For example, if the stringent dress code is on your list of cons but it isn't that important to you, give it a 1 or 2. But if the excellent health insurance is a pro, it would probably warrant at least a 7 or an 8.

Next, add up each list. If the cons outweigh the pros, it's probably worth at least considering a change. If nothing else, this exercise will force you to focus on what you specifically do and do not like about your current position and give you a more concrete idea of what to look for in a new position.

You look for ways to improve your current situation but you can't turn it into what you really want
Another useful exercise is to take your list of pros from the previous exercise and expand upon it. Elaborate on the items already on the list and add other items you wish you could claim about your current position. When you're finished, review the list for items you may be able to make happen at your current company.

If you want more responsibility or more flexible hours, you might be able to work that out, whereas if you work for a missile manufacturer and happen to have developed pacifist beliefs since accepting the position

… your only reasonable option is to seek a position in a different company. In other words, before jumping ship under the assumption that a new position will make all your problems vanish in an instant, make the effort to effect improvements in your current position. If trying to make changes proves futile, you'll be more confident that seeking a new position is the right thing to do and believe me it works, while I was having a break to celebrate the birth of my baby girl I enjoyed every single moment of the long nights improving my resume.

Your skills are lagging and your position offers no opportunities to update them
How is your skill set? Are you able to keep your skills up to date? What would happen if your company went under today and you were forced onto the job market? Would you struggle to find a better or even an equivalent position because your skills are out of date? If this is the case, is there anything you can do to rectify the situation in your current position? Are there training opportunities you haven't been taking advantage of?

If it's not possible to stay employable in your current position, it's definitely time to make a change, even if you enjoy the job and your company seems stable. You may be able to supplement your company's deficit by paying for your own training, but without the opportunity to use your new skills in a work environment, such training will be of little value. To determine the current marketability of your present skill set, try searching for jobs equivalent to yours. Do you meet the minimum requirements? As I was working in the payment Industry at Rahaxi Processing Oy I decided that my new job will have to deal with money so it did.

You can't get enough positive reinforcement to keep your spirits up
Do you feel valued? Feeling valued in your job is one of those almost indefinable benefits or forms of compensation that can't be measured by any objective means. The degree to which someone needs to feel valued to be happy in a job varies greatly from person to person. Some people are perfectly content never to receive a word of praise or public acknowledgment of their achievements. For others, this type of recognition is more important than a generous salary.

The first step towards obtaining an appropriate position in this respect is to become aware of your own needs. The next step is to develop some techniques for determining whether these needs will be met when considering a new position, perhaps by asking appropriate questions during interviews or by finding current employees willing to talk. If you're already in a job that you otherwise like, figure out what you need in order to feel valued and find ways to communicate these needs to the appropriate person.

If the only time your boss talks to you is to tell you that you need to do better or improve your attitude, try explaining that it would also be helpful to know when you are doing something right. Try being proactive and ask your peers, your users or your superiors to let you know if there's more you can do to help them. This could have the pleasant side effect of eliciting some positive feedback when they tell you that they're perfectly satisfied with your current level of service. If you still can't get the validation you need, it could be time to seek it elsewhere.

Your salary just isn't enough
Are you paid what you're worth? Although receiving inadequate financial compensation for your efforts is rarely the sole or even the most important reason that people change jobs, it's a significant factor. For most people, being paid what they're worth — at or above the going market rate for their job function — is an essential aspect of feeling valued. Don't know what you are worth? Try looking at comparable positions on job hunting Web sites, review compensation surveys, or update your CV and submit it to a headhunter to solicit feedback after I did my so-called homework on this issue I was contacted by 4 companies.

My request to keep my job under stable circumstances was denied, so I took the only reasonable course of action and secured a position with a different company. In this case, salary was not the only factor, but it was the one that finally persuaded me to make a change into The Change Group.

Your company or work situation has changed radically since you were hired
Your job used to be perfect, but now it has changed. Maybe your company was bought out or your boss retired or got reassigned. Or perhaps your company had a significant shift in operating philosophy or in its mission, and now you're no longer working in the same environment into which you were originally hired.

If such changes occur, you basically have three choices: go with the flow and make the most of the situation; quit; or stay and complain. These types of changes can be so far-reaching in their impact upon your daily life that the result is not dissimilar to being forced to change jobs and companies. You may be going to the same physical location each day, but every other aspect of your job has been transformed.

Even if you're not unhappy with the changes, this is a good opportunity to re-examine where you are in your life and make sure you take full advantage of the new circumstances. As a follower of this Blog remember that even if you have a great job and you want to change it just like I did, you have to keep investing and searching for alternative options to make the goal of a Million euros in less than five years.... as a reader pointed out to me not so long ago " Habit is second nature"

There is a new trend that also might be helpfull to you in your search for a new job, the video resumes have a look and keep in touch: