Re: entropy and sustainability
--- Wei Dai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Economic activity can't increase indefinitely, because eventually we'll have improved our technologies to the limits imposed by physics I don't see why physics limits all technological progress. For example, someone could write improved software, and that would have nothing to do with physical limitations. Engineering improvements can also be made within current knowledge of physics. Similar propositions apply to biological knowledge. New genetic combinations can be invented within the current knowledge of basic biology. Generally, it seems to me that applications of a science can advance even if the science does not. Fred Foldvary = [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/
economic history question
Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray
Re: Grade Inflation
--- Robert A. Book [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't this what the GRE, MCAT, etc., are for? Granted, they don't apply to all post-graduate plans, but it's a start. How many employers require applicants having a BA/BS to have taken the GRE etc. before they are considered for hiring? If few do, then it shows the degree and grades are still a sufficient criterion. Fred Foldvary = [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Re: Grade Inflation
(OK, this is my third attempt in three days to get this particular post through the server... --RAB) Since grades can't get any higher than an A, doesn't grade inflation merely squeeze out information regarding graduates as the grade scale gets compressed at the high end? You would think that smart employers would know to rate a B+ student from a tough-grading school more favorably than an A- student from an easy-grading school. But there are too many schools, and most employers aren't using a national database of with statistics about each school. Grade inflation ignorance can also be seen in the several organizations which equate GPAs across schools and majors, by for example setting minimum required GPAs to apply. These include a lot of jobs on and off campus and some graduate programs. Not to mention fraternities and most honor societies, graduation with distinction, and qualification for undergraduate honors programs. (but I digress) I believe there is some evidence that grade inflation is not uniform across fields, at the same school. When I was an undergrad, the conventional wisdom among sutdents was that grades depended on the street where the class was held -- meaning, on the street occupied by the science and math departments and the engineering school, the average grade given was a full point below the average for the rest of the campus. I never personally saw the data for that claim, but it did somewhat reflect my personal experience, and I believe there is data out there someplace showing this is a general trend. It is worth noting that this could reflect either subject-biased grade inflation (easier grading in humanities and social sciences relative to science/math/engineering), or subject-biased content deflation -- grades might represent the same degree of mastery of the subject, but some departments (Hum/SocSci) teach easier material. In this latter case, there could still be subject-unbiased grade inflation also, of course. In a world in which grad schools and employers set minimum GPAs to apply, equating them across majors, the losers are those in the harder(-grading) majors. --Robert First Law of Work: If you can't get your work done in the first 24 hours, work nights.
Re: entropy and sustainabilityt
Robert wrote: 'meaning a pristine environment 6 billion years from now might be worth more to them than one now. After all, by then the human race, the cancer on the planet might be gone and the environment will be truly natural according to some points of view.' For those who haven't heard of it, check out VHEMT (pronounced vehement). It's the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, you can learn all about it at www.vhemt.org. It's an eye opener. -jsh __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/
RE: economic history question
That was certainly Bismarck's theory when he introduced them to Germany in the 1870's. It was a part of an effort to undermine the Social Democratic Party in Germany. -Original Message- From: Gray, Lynn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:09 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: economic history question Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray
Re: economic history question
There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: Grade Inflation
--- Robert A. Book [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't this what the GRE, MCAT, etc., are for? Granted, they don't apply to all post-graduate plans, but it's a start. Fred Foldvary ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) responded: How many employers require applicants having a BA/BS to have taken the GRE etc. before they are considered for hiring? If few do, then it shows the degree and grades are still a sufficient criterion. Good point. I'm sure few if any do, which raises an perhaps even more interesting question: Most graduate schools are part of universities which also have undergraduate programs, and most graduate schools require some standardized tests. Does that mean they put less confidence in the degrees and grades they themselves give, than the employers do? There are two caveats to taking that question the way I'd like to. First, I suspect employers use personal interviews much more than graduate schools do; perhaps interviews produce more, or more relevant information than a standardized test. Second, I wonder how the standardized testing community would react to employers wanting to use existing tests for hiring purposes. Surely there is nothing to stop job applicants from taking the GRE, but I don't believe there is any existing mechanism for employers to receive score reports directly from ETS. (Schools seem to want scores from ETS, not from the applicant, probably to prevent forgery.) The absense of such a mechanism may mean there is no demand for the service from employers, or it could mean the suppliers refuse to supply for some reason. --Robert
RE: economic history question
We need data! -Please it is fairly obvious the question being asked here. If you want to differentiate in one's answer that's understandable, but otherwise the question is straightforward. -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: economic history question
Most observers have always been very surprised that there never was a big demand for socialism in the United States - even at the height of the depression. The New Deal was very much driven by the Executive branch not by Congress - thus I think things could have been quite different had we not had FDR. Alex P.S. Note also that many of the programs of the New Deal had the effect of increasing and lengthening unemployment thus the safety net of unemployment insurance could be seen as more of a safety net for the New Deal than for capitalism. -- Dr. Alexander Tabarrok Vice President and Director of Research The Independent Institute 100 Swan Way Oakland, CA, 94621-1428 Tel. 510-632-1366, FAX: 510-568-6040 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: economic history question
The program I was manly referring to was the unemployment insurance program. By calls for the US to abandon capitalism I was referring to the vocal supporters of American socialism back in the years leading up to the Great Depression. The % share of the US public which advocates socialism has seemingly declined since programs like unemployment insurance have been put in place. If it were not for these type of programs might we have seen an increasing level of social unrest with a decreasing patience with capitalism. Such increasing unrest finally giving way to the end of capitalism and to US socialism. Thus it would follow that limited govt interventions in the market actually saved capitalism. Lynn -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
RE: economic history question
Lynn, It seems that you have one observation to base your conclusion. There may have been numerous other reasons why socialism declined in the US: WWII (socialism may have been unpatriotic, the Great Depression, the 1929 stock market crash (people may have felt sorry for the rich), happened by chance, etc. The basic problem here is that there is one observation, with many competing potential causes. Without more data, one cannot make a defensible conclusion about the cause of the observation. Tim Maull On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Gray, Lynn wrote: The program I was manly referring to was the unemployment insurance program. By calls for the US to abandon capitalism I was referring to the vocal supporters of American socialism back in the years leading up to the Great Depression. The % share of the US public which advocates socialism has seemingly declined since programs like unemployment insurance have been put in place. If it were not for these type of programs might we have seen an increasing level of social unrest with a decreasing patience with capitalism. Such increasing unrest finally giving way to the end of capitalism and to US socialism. Thus it would follow that limited govt interventions in the market actually saved capitalism. Lynn -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: economic history question
Most observers have always been very surprised that there never was a big demand for socialism in the United States - even at the height of the depression. The New Deal was very much driven by the Executive branch not by Congress - thus I think things could have been quite different had we not had FDR. Alex I don't share that interpretation. I think the American party system was able to absorb and ameliorate the demand for socialism. My take is that the American labor movement was quite like the European socialist movement, and was quite prominent (remember Eugene V. Debs?). But the big parties were able to produce concessions - for ex, TR's trust busting or FDR's New Deal. Fabio
RE: economic history question
Thanks. To be honest, I had a suspicion this is what you meant, but wanted to hear it for sure. My study of history never gave me the impression that the push for socialism - not just socialist programs like unemployment insurance and right-to-work programs, but actual community ownership of the means of production - was never as severe in the U.S. as it was in Europe. I think the few instances of open socialist sentiment - the Haymarket riots, the various commune experiments of the Progressive era, etc - are noted historically because they're unique and atypical, not because they're indicative of a trend. And while the Progressive movement itself - Frank Norris, Ida Tarbell, etc - probably drew a lot of water from the socialist well, I don't think it would be ideologically accurate to call that movement socialist itself. So, my answer is: I don't think there was a strong socialist movement in the U.S. to begin with, so I don't know how legitimate the question is. -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:35:48 -0500 The program I was manly referring to was the unemployment insurance program. By calls for the US to abandon capitalism I was referring to the vocal supporters of American socialism back in the years leading up to the Great Depression. The % share of the US public which advocates socialism has seemingly declined since programs like unemployment insurance have been put in place. If it were not for these type of programs might we have seen an increasing level of social unrest with a decreasing patience with capitalism. Such increasing unrest finally giving way to the end of capitalism and to US socialism. Thus it would follow that limited govt interventions in the market actually saved capitalism. Lynn -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
RE: economic history question
Would we have seen an increasing level of social unrest had capitalism been left alone? Has/was capitalism been saved? From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:35:48 -0500 The program I was manly referring to was the unemployment insurance program. By calls for the US to abandon capitalism I was referring to the vocal supporters of American socialism back in the years leading up to the Great Depression. The % share of the US public which advocates socialism has seemingly declined since programs like unemployment insurance have been put in place. If it were not for these type of programs might we have seen an increasing level of social unrest with a decreasing patience with capitalism. Such increasing unrest finally giving way to the end of capitalism and to US socialism. Thus it would follow that limited govt interventions in the market actually saved capitalism. Lynn -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Fwd: Announcing IP newsletter
Thought that some on this list might be interested in this: -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Announcing IP newsletter Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 13:20:26 -0400 From: James Bessen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: IP Newsletter [EMAIL PROTECTED] You are invited to subscribe to a free newsletter called Technological Innovation and Intellectual Property (TIIP). This new newsletter reports on recent research in the economics, law, history and sociology of intellectual property, including Free/Open Source Software. Written primarily by economists and legal scholars, the newsletter contains brief, easy to understand summaries of research papers. The newsletter aims to help researchers and interested non-academics keep abreast of this rapidly expanding literature. If you would like to subscribe, please simply reply to this email or send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with Subscribe as the subject. You may unsubscribe at any time. If you would like to find out more about the newsletter, please visit http://www.researchoninnovation.org/tiip/. The web site also includes information about contributing to the newsletter. Please feel free to forward this email to interested parties. Thank you. The TIIP Editorial Board James Bessen (Research on Innovation) Robert Hunt (Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia) Kristina Lybecker (Drexel University, Economics) Cecil Quillen, Jr., Advisor (Cornerstone Research, Law) Arti Rai (University of Pennsylvania, Law) Rosemarie Ziedonis (University of Pennsylvania, Wharton) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.researchoninnovation.org/tiip/ ---
RE: economic history question
Well, of course it cant be stated absolutely either way. My impression is that over time from the populist movement of the late 1800s to the 1930s the nations patience with the down side of pure capitalism declined. I could be wrong in that though. Lynn -Original Message- From: Bryan Etzel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 3:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: economic history question Would we have seen an increasing level of social unrest had capitalism been left alone? Has/was capitalism been saved? From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:35:48 -0500 The program I was manly referring to was the unemployment insurance program. By calls for the US to abandon capitalism I was referring to the vocal supporters of American socialism back in the years leading up to the Great Depression. The % share of the US public which advocates socialism has seemingly declined since programs like unemployment insurance have been put in place. If it were not for these type of programs might we have seen an increasing level of social unrest with a decreasing patience with capitalism. Such increasing unrest finally giving way to the end of capitalism and to US socialism. Thus it would follow that limited govt interventions in the market actually saved capitalism. Lynn -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: economic history question There are a lot of abstractions that it'd help to qualify in that last statement. For instance: which government programs (FDR's right-to-work packages? LBJ's war on Poverty)? Whose calls for the U.S. to abandon capitalism? What is a safety net [...] for capitalism as a whole? We need data! -JP From: Gray, Lynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: economic history question Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:08:41 -0500 Would it be safe to say that the introduction of govt programs such as unemployment insurance had an impact in quieting the calls for the US to abandon capitalism and take up socialism? In other words did these types of govt programs serve not only as safety nets for individuals in need but also for capitalism as a whole? Lynn Gray --- - -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, Powertrip _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com _ Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
