When thinking of “market distortions” we typically imagine government regulations, taxes, and subsidies that prevent market mechanisms from achieving an optimal outcome. For example, if you pay $100 for a 30-minute taxi ride (as is the case in many European capitals), you can easily relate it to a government regulation requiring all taxi drivers to be licensed (at a very high cost). In the absence of such a requirement, many more drivers would be able to enter the taxi driving profession, increasing supply and reducing prices.

The value of a currency, measured in terms of other currencies, has consequences for the real economy. A more expensive lari, for example, makes it more profitable to import goods into Georgia. The importer has to pay the foreign goods with foreign currency, and when the lari is more valuable, fewer lari is needed to pay for them.

In our last week’s article, we examined Georgia’s economic growth in the 12 months before the 2012 parliamentary elections. In particular, we reviewed the popular argument that much of this economic growth was driven by the “political business cycle” effect of public (over)spending prior to the elections.

When economists speak about education and human capital, they usually mean formal education. It is provided in schools and universities by formally qualified teachers. These are imparting knowledge that is laid down in curricula, and the result of the learning process is testified by certificates and diplomas conferred to those students who passed exams.

Measuring economic developments is often a laborious business. Consider, for example, the Consumer Price Index (CPI). One first has to define the so-called consumption basket that contains the goods and services whose prices you want to track. These goods and services have to be represented in the basket in the right proportions, reflecting the consumption patterns of an average consumer.