Re: returns to higher education
I don't know much about this subject, but the work on the returns to fancy private schools suggest that there are very limited returns to going to a fancy private school. The last study I saw suggested that alma mater makes very little difference whatsoever. Although I saw somewhere a similar study that said that Harvard and Yale don't fit that model. Mitch - Original Message - From: "Edward Lopez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:48 pm Subject: returns to higher education > I recently read a newspaper column by a Daniel S. Cheever, > president of Simmons College in Boston. He claims that a college > graduate will, on average, earn $800,000 more than a high school > graduate over a lifetime. > > Discounting aside, this still seems rather high to me. Not > knowing this issue, and being ignorant of labor economics, can > anyone offer a quick verification of this figure? I know it > depends on degree and institution. What do reliable estimates say > about a bottom line figure such as this one? > > Ed. > > Edward J. López > Assistant Professor > Department of Economics > University of North Texas > P.O. Box 311457 > Denton, TX 76203-1457 > Tel: 940.369.7005 > Fax: 940.565.4426 > NEW EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Web: www.econ.unt.edu/elopez > >
Re: Handicapping the 2001 Noble Prize in Economics
I'd love to see Tullock or Smith. My prediction is that the winner will be some obscure person. Not a single one of us will be able to think of what he's done. Mitch - Original Message - From: Bryan Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:37 pm Subject: Re: Handicapping the 2001 Noble Prize in Economics > My wish (not prediction): Joint prize for Anne Krueger and Gordon > Tullock for rent-seeking. > -- >Prof. Bryan Caplan > Department of Economics George Mason University >http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Familiar as the voice of the mind is to each, the highest merit > we > ascribe to Moses, Plato, and Milton is, that they set at naught > books and traditions, and spoke not what men but what *they* > thought. A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of > light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the > lustre of the firmament of bards and sages." >--Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance" >
Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust
Armchair: There is some possibility that in addition to the other answers there is a cascade affect. If some females respond by having sex, others may copy. There is evidence that females in other species copy each other's matings decisions. That might happen in humans as well. Female Acorn Woodpeckers for example go to elaborate lengths to ensure that they are all breeding at the same time. The question of course is, if females copy each other in humans as well, why don't we see stronger birth patterns? I've copied a related abstract from an article in the American Naturalist that discusses the topic. JOURNAL. Pruett-Jones, S. "Independent Versus Nonindependent Mate Choice do Females Copy Each Other?" American Naturalist, v.140, n.6, 1992:1000-1009 Abstract: There is increasing evidence from both observational and experimental studies that females may copy each other's mating decisions. Female copying can be defined as a type of nonindependent choice in which the probability that a female chooses a given male increases if other females have chosen that male and decreases if they have not. The important characteristic of copying behavior that separates it from other similar processes is that the change in the probability of choice is strictly because of the actions of other females and not the consequences of those actions (e.g., male's behavior changing as a result of successful matings). A game-theory model suggests that the adaptive significance of female copying may depend primarily on the ratio of the costs to the benefits of active mate choice. Copying behavior, and more generally conspecific cueing, may be important in many behavioral processes beyond mate choice. - Original Message - From: Robin Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, October 1, 2001 12:08 pm Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > Fabio Rojas wrote: > >An article in the LA Times discusses how high levels of stress > >change hormonal balances in the body causing, ahem, sexual arousal > >during times of stress. > > William Dickens wrote: > >Well that (if the LA Times got it right) is a very odd fact. Why > would we > >be programmed to make babies when we are under stress as opposed > to when > >we are fat and content? ... it really seems that such an impulse > would be > >counter productive. ... Perhaps our emotional/behavioral systems > simply > >aren't sophisticated enough to parse out different types of > arousal, but > >if that is true that should throw a lot of suspicion on the whole > >enterprise of evolutionary psychology since the mechanisms that > are being > >posited concerning sexuality and social interaction are usually > much more > >highly nuanced than this. > > One evolutionary psychology interpretation would be that when a > group is > suddenly threatened, its members are programmed to reassure each > other of > their affection and loyalty. Sex can do that. Babies may result, > but > perhaps other processes can reduce that effect when babies are > less desired. > > Robin Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hanson.gmu.edu > Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University > MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030- > 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 >
RE: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust
James, Those cursed American consumers! When will they learn matieralism! If only there was a class they could take that would teach them, but if we can't teach it who could? - Original Message - From: "James Sproule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2001 6:27 am Subject: RE: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > Misery, it seems, loves company. How much less depressing life is if > everyone is having a hard time, indeed, look no further than > Communism to > see how everyone being miserable together is still seen by some as > preferable to people getting on and succeeding as a result of > their own > efforts. > > The bigger question for me (sitting here in London) is when will > the US > consumer snap out of their present mood and once again begin to shop? > > James > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of > John Cunningham > Sent: 01 October 2001 18:25 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > > > > I think I recall also reading somewhere that suicide rates dropped > markedlyduring both the Great Depression and WW II. > > John > > At 11:43 AM 10/1/01 -0400, you wrote: > >A lot of Soviet citizens, similarly, (retrospectively) claimed > they were > >happiest during World War II, when something like 1-out-of-8 > perished!>-- > > Prof. Bryan Caplan > >Department of Economics George Mason University > > http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > "Familiar as the voice of the mind is to each, the highest > merit we > >ascribe to Moses, Plato, and Milton is, that they set at naught > >books and traditions, and spoke not what men but what *they* > >thought. A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of > >light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the > >lustre of the firmament of bards and sages." > > --Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Self-Reliance" > > >
Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust
Possibly. In many species of birds, the female will mate with high quality males who are often not around b/c high quality males have many mating opportunities. The female then nests with a lower quality male who raises the young. I don't actually know if humans do this, b/c humans don't always fit the models. Mitch Mitchell - Original Message - From: "William Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, October 3, 2001 7:17 am Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > I think this is a good EP explanation for men, but there is a > problem with it as an explanation for women. I have to admit that > I don't know if women are aroused by stress as well, but from the > woman's perspective it would seem that her offspring would be most > likely to succeed if she waited for the guys to come back and then > picked from that bunch. They would presumably be a more fit sub- > sample of the original population and would be more likely to be > around to help provide for the children. - - Bill Dickens > > > William T. Dickens > The Brookings Institution > 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW > Washington, DC 20036 > Phone: (202) 797-6113 > FAX: (202) 797-6181 > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > AOL IM: wtdickens > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/01/01 10:19PM >>> >With regard to Mr. Dickens' comment regarding whether stress > should cause > sexual arousal, I am tempted to think that evolutionary psychology > can > certainly explain this phenomenon. Early societies, according to > most models > of human development, used the males as hunters and warriors; > females were > gatherers. With this division of labor, males certainly incurred > the more > perilous part of the community's job. Before an important hunt or > major > battle, it is manifestly in the male's evolutionary favor to > become sexually > aroused; after all, this may be his genome's last chance to > reproduce itself! > Even if he dies in battle, his sex partners -- still safely at > home -- will > be able to bear his young. > >
Happiness, Trust and mate selection
I'm not a father, but those of you who think you are might want to check. Those of you who have been surprised at how wonderful your offspring are, should be doubly cautious. Mitch - Original Message - From: Jacob W Bræstrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, October 3, 2001 1:32 pm Subject: SV: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > > I remember to have both read and seen (on discovery channel) a > couple of > studies that conclude that human females do in fact use this same > strategyas the birds (nesting with the reliable male, but mating > with the high > quality). I believe this was labelled as a "superior mating > strategy" - just > as the "superior male mating strategy" is to find the right mix of > quality(staying and raising his offspring) and quantity (mating > with as many as > possible). > > That this primal urge among women was still alive and kicking was > allegedlyconfirmed by a study (conducted on british discos, I > believe) showing that > women are more prone to go out alone (with female friends - whithout > boyfriends / husbands) when they also have the biggest chance of > gettingpregnant. That - compaired with the girls NOT "pregnant- > prone" - these girls > were also more likely to be "dressed to kill". And - finally - > that girls > where more likely to be unfaithful at this time of the month. > > Also supporting this theory is a study (reported this summer in Danish > media) based on the growing number of instances where a father > volunteers to > donate an organ to one of his own children. In 15 percent of these > cases (in > Denmark) - if I remember right - the DNA test reveiled that the > two were NOT > related (of course the fathers were not told this - only that > there was no > match). Presumably these figures excluded fathers who already knew > that they > were not the father of the child. > > Although it is probably a somewhat small sample (I don't remember > the size), > it is nevertheless pretty representative of the population at > large, I would > say. > > As I said, most of this is just what I remember off hand - can anyone > confirm??? > > Jacob Wimpffen Bræstrup > Esthersvej 22, 2tv. > DK-2900 Hellerup > DENMARK > Tel: (+45) 39 400 600 / 2020 3232 > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Power threatens; wealth rewards: one eludes power by deceiving > it; to > obtain the favours of wealth one must serve it: the latter is > thereforebound to win" > - Constant's speech given at the Athénée Royal, 1819 > > > > > -Oprindelig meddelelse- > Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]På > vegne af > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sendt: 3. oktober 2001 17:12 > Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Emne: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > > > Possibly. In many species of birds, the female will mate with high > quality males who are often not around b/c high quality males have > manymating opportunities. The female then nests with a lower > quality male > who raises the young. I don't actually know if humans do this, b/c > humans don't always fit the models. > > Mitch Mitchell > > - Original Message - > From: "William Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wednesday, October 3, 2001 7:17 am > Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > > > I think this is a good EP explanation for men, but there is a > > problem with it as an explanation for women. I have to admit that > > I don't know if women are aroused by stress as well, but from the > > woman's perspective it would seem that her offspring would be most > > likely to succeed if she waited for the guys to come back and then > > picked from that bunch. They would presumably be a more fit sub- > > sample of the original population and would be more likely to be > > around to help provide for the children. - - Bill Dickens > > > > > > William T. Dickens > > The Brookings Institution > > 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW > > Washington, DC 20036 > > Phone: (202) 797-6113 > > FAX: (202) 797-6181 > > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > AOL IM: wtdickens > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/01/01 10:19PM >>> > >With regard to Mr. Dickens' comment regarding whether stress > > should cause > > sexual arousal, I am tempted to think that evolutionary psychology > > can > > certainly explain this phenomenon. Early societies, according to > > most models > > of human development, used the males as hunters and warriors; > > females were > > gatherers. With this division of labor, males certainly incurred > > the more > > perilous part of the community's job. Before an important hunt or > > major > > battle, it is manifestly in the male's evolutionary favor to > > become sexually > > aroused; after all, this may be his genome's last chance to > > reproduce itself! > > Even if he dies in battle, his sex partners -- still safely at > > home -- will > > be able to bear his young. > > > > > >
Re:
People talk negatively about their experiences at Chicago. Unless you want something quite distinctive, I would recommend the highest ranking school that you can get into. Mitch - Original Message - From: markjohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, November 1, 2001 1:34 am > Armchairs, > > Biases out, which school is the best place to study economics and why? > >
Re: Tax with positive growth effect
For a very brief period of time several places in South Carolina tried to tax idle land. The accessor would try to figure out what the most valuable improvement to the land would be and then asses based on that. It was a horrible failure. While I don't know of any corruption, you can imagine that there was an opportunity for it. What did happen is that landlords would throw up the absolute cheapest building that he could in order to avoid the assesor coming up with some idea. It turns out that cheap often vacant buildings have all sorts of externalities that idle land does not have. I don't think the experiment lasted a full two years. Mitch - Original Message - From: Fred Foldvary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:39 pm Subject: Re: Tax with positive growth effect > --- Alexander Guerrero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well before yo tax "idle" land, you must be "sure" that the land > > is "wasted", > > No, the whole rationale for taxing land value is that it does not > matter what the site owner does with the land. Those who "waste" it > will have to pay the same rate as those who maximize rental income. > > > And, believe me, this is something which has been > > always very difficult to assess. > > How do you know? > Insurance companies manage to appraise land value, because they don't > want the insured to collect on that if the building burns down. > > > The big > > question is : Does the land lord like to have idle land? > > If he does, fine; let him pay for that consumption. > > Fred Foldvary > > > = > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. > http://personals.yahoo.com >
RE: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust
The problem with all of this is that humans don't really fit the mold. In other animals it is always the male who is adorned. The male lion has the mane. The male peacock has the long tail. Even in less glamorous birds like ducks. The male is more colorful. In humans however, it appears that it is the women who spend more time primping and preening. (Good thing, I've already disqualified myself from running for office.)Males tend to spend less time on their appearance. Even though I'm the worst offender for bringing in animal behavior models, this would seem to make these models less applicable to humans. David Mitchell - Original Message - From: "William Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2001 3:27 pm Subject: RE: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > Since Darwin we normally think that it is women who choose which > males to mate with since males want to mate indiscriminately. Thus > you would expect it would be the male who would have to adapt to > the woman and not the other way around. However, if we are talking > about males supporting women and/or forming lifetime bonds then we > have an evolutionary game and it isn't clear what the outcome is. > However, that just puts us back in the dilemma that I proposed > earlier. We can see that it might be in men's interest to want to > mate when threatened but not women. I don't deny the empirical > fact, I just don't buy the explanations that have been given. - - > Bill Dickens > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/03/01 12:12PM >>> > I think the popularity of "Nightmare on Elm Street", etc., > including with many young women, is fairly relevant, > and supportive of "stress arousal". > > I'd suspect a strong second order effect in women: > the men are "more than usually" aroused; > which leads to "more than usual" arousal in the women. > I'd suspect women who are NOT more than usually > aroused with such men to be at a doubly severe > evolutionary disadvantage: a) fewer children overall, > and b) less likely to keep a father around to help > with the kids she does have. > > > > Tom Grey > > -Original Message- > From: William Dickens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 4:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Disaster Raises Happiness, Trust > > > I think this is a good EP explanation for men, but there is a > problem with > it as an explanation for women. I have to admit that I don't know > if women > are aroused by stress as well, but from the woman's perspective it > wouldseem that her offspring would be most likely to succeed if > she waited for > the guys to come back and then picked from that bunch. They would > presumablybe a more fit sub-sample of the original population and > would be more likely > to be around to help provide for the children. - - Bill Dickens > > > William T. Dickens > The Brookings Institution > 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW > Washington, DC 20036 > Phone: (202) 797-6113 > FAX: (202) 797-6181 > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > AOL IM: wtdickens > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/01/01 10:19PM >>> >With regard to Mr. Dickens' comment regarding whether stress > shouldcause > sexual arousal, I am tempted to think that evolutionary psychology > can > certainly explain this phenomenon. Early societies, according to most > models > of human development, used the males as hunters and warriors; > females were > gatherers. With this division of labor, males certainly incurred > the more > perilous part of the community's job. Before an important hunt or > major > battle, it is manifestly in the male's evolutionary favor to > become sexually > > aroused; after all, this may be his genome's last chance to reproduce > itself! > Even if he dies in battle, his sex partners -- still safely at > home -- will > > be able to bear his young. > >
RE: random nobel
who is spence? - Original Message - From: markjohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, October 11, 2001 0:46 am > stiglitz, akerlof, spence > >
Re: Friedman Prize
Both Walensa and Havel are potential recipients. When is someone going to really free Latin America? Mitch - Original Message - From: Carl Close <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 4:18 pm Subject: Re: Friedman Prize > Lech Walesa should be a contender for the prize. John Paul II also > played a big part behind-the-scenes in spreading support for the > Solidarity movement (according to Jonathan Kwitny's book MAN OF > THE > CENTURY), but I don't think he's likely to get the prize. > > Carl > > > Speaking of prizes, Cato has just announced a biennial Milton > >Friedman Prize for the Advancement of Liberty. The award will be > a cash > >prize of $500,000 to one individual for "significant achievement > in the > >advancement of liberty." The first prize will be presented May > 9, 2002. > > > > Any predictions/wishes/thoughts? > > > > Note by the way how far things have come since the early > days of say > >Mont Pelerin when there were some 8 democracies left in the world, > >socialism was advancing everywhere, and people like Friedman and > Hayek>were universally thought of as cranks. Makes me optimistic. > > > >Alex > >-- > >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: The Economics of Military Stop-Loss Policies
Mike, I think that the main difference is that during the draft, young men spent considerable amounts of energy avoiding the draft. In this case there's no reason to suspect that men will enroll in college to avoid the stop gap measures. Obviously some people will be unlikely to enlist if they think that they might not be able to leave on time. What is the elasticity of supply for enlistees? I suspect it is pretty inelastic with regards to potentail stop gap measures. You might find that the numbers are not too different. Also, what sort of choices do enlistees have? If an enlistee thinks that he will be forced to stay if he chooses intel, will he be able to get into procurement instead? If that is the case, then you might find that you don't get the best people for particular jobs. Mitch - Original Message - From: Strobl Maj Michael R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 8:47 am Subject: The Economics of Military Stop-Loss Policies > Armchairs, > > The military's current stop-loss policy prevents certain service > membersfrom leaving the service at the end of their normal > enlistment contract. > This policy is affecting specific skills and grades deemed > critical for the > war on terrorism. In econimic terms, what are the similarities and > dissimilarities between stop-loss and a conventional draft? > > My thoughts... > > Similarities: > - Those affected by stop-loss are, in a sense, draftees. > - Therefore, stop-loss bypasses efficient labor market allocation > mechanisms. > - Stop-loss will tend to understate the economic (if not > accounting) cost of > military manpower--the largest portion of the defense budget. > - Stop-loss (arguably) encourages inefficient utilization of society's > resources. > > Dissimilarities: > - Those affected presumably have a higher preference for military > servicethan those normally targeted in a "conventional draft" > (i.e., the 18 year > old with little or no inclination toward military service). How > does this > affect the concept of economic rents? > - Stop-loss doesn't require nearly the bureacratic overhead (e.g., > selectiveservice system, tracking down evaders) of a conventional > draft.- Under a conventional draft, and the military's current > closed labor > system, you can't draft, say, an intelligence specialist with 10 > year's of > experience. > > Your thoughts... > > Regards, > Maj Mike Strobl > USMC, Manpower Analyst > >
Re: MBA's for senior exec's
I'm somewhat familiar with ITT Hartford's executive program. For most things like basic accounting, the expected people to learn it on their own, they taught it at the office, or they paid for courses at local colleges. For the upper level management and people who were being groomed for upper level management, they used a different method. These people would go take executive MBA courses at top schools but they wouldn't get an executive MBA and the type of classes were different from a traditional MBA program. Much more managing other managers courses and strategic planning. These courses mirrored what Chris Coyne mentioned. But, managers didn't take more than two classes from any one school. So I know that they used the University of Michigan's Managing other Managers course, but not its advanced finance course (for that they used Wake Forest or UPenn). The idea was that you would get the best course in the country not just what was offered at any particular school. The other advantage was that employees never got an actual MBA. They had learned; and they had had nice trips, but they didn't have an MBA that they could put on their resume to take to other companies. That method makes a lot of sense to me, but I've never heard of any other company doing it that way. So does ITT-Hartford know something that no one else does, or is it the other way around? Mitch - Original Message - From: "Chris Coyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 0:20 am Subject: Re: MBA's for senior exec's > > Yet another potential reason could be that these programs keep > executives up to speed on the latest management techniques, > technology, etc. Most MBA programs, from what I understand, are > less about lecturing and more about sharing various experiences > and case study analysis amongst the participants. Presenting > executives with the opportunity for continued education may be a > way to get them to think "out of the box" and to gain new, "fresh" > ideas and experiences through interaction with others outside of > their firm (and its culture). > I'm not sure about those at the executive level, but I know > that with lower to mid level employees, some firms require a > certain commitment after the degree is completed (at least that's > how it was in the IB industry) to ensure at least some return from > their investment. I would also put stock in Pete's efficiency > wage explanation since a major selling point of many firms is > their commitment to continued investment in the development of > their employees. > > > Chris Coyne > > Graduate Student > > Department of Economics > > George Mason University > > > > > > > > > >From: "Peter J Boettke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Subject: Re: MBA's for senior exec's > > >Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 20:18:47 -0500 > > > > > >If it is not useful, then why do companies pay for > Executive MBA programs? > > >I have known several high ranking executives here > in the Northern Virginia > > >area --- for Mobil/Exxon and other companies --- > who have gone on to earn > > >Executive MBA's from Georgetown, Virginia or > William & Mary (alas GMU does > > >not compete well in this market). The programs are > expensive in terms of > > >tuition, but the treatment of the students is also > exotic --- a friend in > > >the Georgetown program had to go with his > classmates on a trip to China and > > >to Cancun as part of the program! Everyone I know > did not pay a dime for > > >their schooling --- their companies paid the entire > bill, plus made the > > >commitment to give them the release time from work > for course work and the > > >in-residence requirement. > > > > > >So what is the value-added? > > > > > >(A) Mid-career executives have already sent the > signal; > > >(B) Presumably at that stage of their career they > have also established > > >their network. > > > > > >So what could it be? > > > > > >There must be some value-added to the firm > otherwise why would they pay? Is > > >it a form of an efficiency wage? (I wouldn't want > to work for an employer > > >who wouldn't give educational benefits to its > employees --- and if they > > >do -- then boy do I work for a good company and > will bust my butt for them). > > > > > >Pete > > > > > >Peter J. Boettke, Deputy Director > > >James M. Buchanan Center for Political Economy > > >Department of Economics, MSN 3G4 > > >George Mason University > > >Fairfax, VA 22030 > > >PHONE: 703-993-1149 > > >FAX: 703-993-1133 > > >EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >HOMEPAGE: > http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/pboettke > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "fabio guillermo rojas" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:14 PM > > >Subject: MBA's for seni
the rule of law without formal government in Mexico
I thought that members of the list might find this to be a very interesting article on law without formal government. I don't know if you would condone the sentence for manslaughter but it is interesting nonetheless. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29696-2002Mar14.html Mitch
Re: the rule of law without formal government in Mexico
I'm not exactly sure what to call this. It appears that they have some sort of evolved method for dealing with criminals. You might call this a government. The elders certainly seem to have coercive power. You might argue that there are always going to be cultural differences. I thought being buried alive for manslaughter was a bit much. I suspect that most Americans would agree with me. Other cultures might not agree. I also wondered if part of the sentence dealt with the poverty of the area. They might have preferred to sentence the man to five years but been unable to do so. Honestly, I just thought it was an extremely interesting article. Highlighting how different the third world really is. Mitch - Original Message - From: "Jacob W Braestrup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 3:19 am Subject: Re: the rule of law without formal government in Mexico > > > > So is that it then? Is this what anarchists talk > > about when they speak of justice sans government? > > I am not so sure that you can characterise the situation in Mexico > as > one describing justice WITHOUT government, but more a case of > justice > by citizens in the face of what is perceived as lack of justice > provided by government. > > Not that I believe this to be good, though. My point is, that the > government simply makes things worse. Local justice cannot grow > and > mature in to e.g. a system of common law, guided by general > principles > and with formal procedures, appeals and defence lawyers and what > not > BECAUSE THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT ALLOW THAT. They would > surely > crack down if any village set up a formal system of justice, even > if > this system was far superior to the ad hoc system now used. > > So villagers are stuck with the worst of both worlds: a government > that > cannot efficiently run a system of justice (or will not, if the > reports > of bribery are true) along with a local system of local justice > that > is not allowed to evolve beyond anything more than a lynching now > and > then > > sincerely, > > jacob W Braestrup > Denmark >
Re: Copy Protection of CDs
Some time ago Mark Wilson sent in an email on copy protection harming hardware. Apparently a felt tip pen can foil that. http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/05/21/bc.media.cd.piracy.reut.reut /index.html?related Mitch - Original Message - From: "Mark Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, May 13, 2002 5:26 pm Subject: Copy Protection of CDs > Evidently, Copy-protection schemes can actually damage hardware: > > http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner? 30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB=REQINT1=53255 > > > That record companies think this is a solution is laughable. > Okay, so a CD won't play in my computer and I can't 'rip' it and > encode into MP3. Does this prevent the technologically savvy from > sending the digital signal from their standalone CD player into > their soundcard and encoding it this way, and then, of course, > distributing to the non-savvy crowd? So..the record company has > achieved nothing as far as preventing piracy, but has diminished > the value of their product by not allowing it to be played on a > computer, and left themselves open to potential lawsuits from > damaged hardware, and possibly from Philips, who owns the CD > patent, and is none too happy about this... > > Mark Wilson > Appalachian State University >
RE: Consumer Reports on Deregulation
On Bill's pint about quality competition. I've heard that during the days of regulated air travel, airlines apparently competed on the beauty of the stewardesses. I've been told by numerous sourcces (but have no real evidence) that some business magazines would rate the quality of the stewardesses in each airline. If you favor hiring people based on their ability to serve coffee and tea instead of their looks, you might favor deregulation. mitch mitchell - Original Message - From: "William Dickens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, June 10, 2002 5:08 pm Subject: RE: Consumer Reports on Deregulation > >Also relevant is quality and availability of service. Previously > prices>may have been cheap/falling but the range of offering, customer > >treatment or availability may have constrained enjoyment of the > service>to a sub optimal level. Deregulation could/should change > this. (I think > >it has in my limited experience) > > Exactly the opposite of what happened in the formerly regulated > markets I'm familiar with. With prices fixed at a level that gave > most good companies very good rates of return they competed by > increasing quality. Quality has declined most noticeably in air > travel and the brokerage industry, but arguably in trucking and > banking as well. > > >I'm also not sure to what extent the prices charged were also > controlled>by governments as a macroeconomic tool to reduce > measures of inflation? > >Any thoughts? > > Since the regulatory agencies tended to be captured by the > regulated industry (or at least sympathetic) prices tended to be > too high (thus the price declines) rather than too low. > > As someone else said, the counterfactual is everything. CR is > comparing the price declines during the 50s, 60s and early 70s > with the price declines in the late 70s, and 80s. Productivity > growth was notably faster in the earlier period than the later > period. Would prices have declined as much in the 80s in trucking > airlines, and phone service if there hadn't been deregulation? > From the studies I've seen I seriously doubt it. > > Of course not everybody's prices decline. Regulation did tend to > set prices too low for many low volume markets. In those places > prices have skyrocketed. I suspect that some of this is just price > rising to meet marginal cost, but because these are also markets > with substantial fixed costs (maintaining terminals, ticket agents > etc.) there is probably also some element of natural monopoly > pushing prices in these markets up above long-run marginal cost. > > I would guess that there are three factors that account for CR's > anguish about deregulation: 1) Their sense of fairness is offended > by the big price increases experienced in difficult to serve > markets, 2) Coming from the upper middle class as they do, they > put more value on quality and are less concerned about price than > the marginal air traveler/bank customer/brokerage customer so they > experience the change from high q high p to low q low p less > favorably than the new people attracted to the market by the > change, and 3) deregulating a monopoly may cause an increase in > price and to some extent that is what deregulation did (perhaps > most notably in the cable industry, small air markets, and certain > types of phone service). > > With respect to 3) don't think I'm not aware of the competition > that cable faces from satellite or how contestable air markets > are. Imperfect competition and limit pricing still leave plenty of > room for monopolistic distortion. I don't think that _the_ > definitive study on the costs and benefits of deregulation has > been done and I very much doubt that CR's study is it. After all, > CR used to (still does?) insist that economists have to be wrong > about the predictability of capital markets because there are > numerous mutual funds that have had 5 or more years of ROR above > the market average - - without asking how many would be expected > on the basis of chance alone. Thus they used to endorse mutual > funds with exceptional records which, of course, tend to be the > ones with the riskiest strategies (and by the studies I've seen > only infinitesimally better expected returns). Sigh... > - - Bill Dickens > > > > William T. Dickens > The Brookings Institution > 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW > Washington, DC 20036 > Phone: (202) 797-6113 > FAX: (202) 797-6181 > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > AOL IM: wtdickens > > >
Re: rewards from higher Education
I think the article your refering to was called the Education Shiboleth. First week of June in the Economist. Summarized someone's work, but I don't remember who's. Mitch - Original Message - From: "Jacob W Braestrup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 5:56 am Subject: rewards from higher Education > i remember reading something recently in the Economist on the > rewards > from public investment in higher education not being so high after > all > (one of Bryans old points as I remember). > > Now i have been trying to find the article - unsuccesfully! > > can anyone remember which issue? - and/or does anybody know of any > other studies on the subject > > - jacob braestrup >
The Dead Grandmother Syndrome
One of the best articles on statistics I've read. Includes an interesting slant on the need for divorce and remarriage to increase the number of available grandmothers. http://biology.ecsu.ctstateu.edu/People/ConnRev
WWII Germany - Olson - American South
If I recall Mancur Olson suggests that one of the reasons that post WWII West Germany did so well is that all of Germany's special interest groups were destroyed. I'm inclined to agree although I know that Germany had tremendous manufacturing ability even at the end of the war. However, why did the South fare so poorly after the US Civil War? Would the South have done better if the Freedmen's Bureau had been kept in place and Southern Bourbons were prevented from forming a powerful interest group? David Mitchell
Re: "Forecasting" the 2002 Noble Memorial Prize in Economics
Nice prediction. - Original Message - From: Bill Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, October 8, 2002 9:22 am Subject: "Forecasting" the 2002 Noble Memorial Prize in Economics > Well, it's that time of the year when Nobel Prizes are announced. > Last year > I was half-correct in predicting that Janet Yellen would win but the > rainmakers in Oslo decided to go with her husband George Akerlof. > This year > I will go out on a limb and predict that the field of experimental > economicswill be recognized with the pioneers Vernon Smith and > Charlie Plott reaping > top awards. Honorable Mention - William Baumol. > >
Re: WWII Germany - Olson - American South
I don't know the answer to that question. Southerners, however, certainly felt that one problem they were having was that the North set up the banking system in such a way as to make it difficult for southerners to acquire captial. You might also argue that the South spent precious resources worrying about blacks. I don't have evidence for that though. Mitch - Original Message - From: "Alypius Skinner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, October 9, 2002 3:28 pm Subject: Re: WWII Germany - Olson - American South > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > If I recall Mancur Olson suggests that one of the reasons that > post WWII > > West Germany did so well is that all of Germany's special interest > > groups were destroyed. > > > > I'm inclined to agree although I know that Germany had tremendous > > manufacturing ability even at the end of the war. However, why > did the > > South fare so poorly after the US Civil War? > > > Olson's "distributional coalitions" remained intact in the US, and > the South > was part of the US. Within a country, why do most major > industries and > financiers locate in one region of a country and not in another? > Why did > industrialists so rarely set up shop in Southern states? Why were > meatpacking, steel, and auto industries, among others, all originally > concentrated in the old Union states? While most of America's > cotton was > grown in the South, why was most textile manufacturing done in the > north? If > anyone has the answer to these questions, we might understand why the > post-War South was for so long impoverished. > > ~Alypius Skinner > > > > >
Re: Unions and Bankruptcy
I would ask Chuck Baird at Cal State Hayward. He'd be most likely to know. You could also ask Jim Bennett at George Mason. Bennett edits the Journal of Labor research. mitch - Original Message - From: Bryan Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, October 11, 2002 11:45 am Subject: Unions and Bankruptcy > I didn't know the answer to this. Does anyone else? > -- >Prof. Bryan Caplan > Department of Economics George Mason University >http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "He wrote a letter, but did not post it because he felt that no > one > would have understood what he wanted to say, and besides it was > not > necessary that anyone but himself should understand it." > Leo Tolstoy, *The Cossacks* --- Begin Message --- Hello Bryan, Has anyone compared whether or not highly unionized firms are more likely to go bankrupt? Jim --- End Message ---
VA sales tax question
There is referendum in two parts of Virginia increase the sales tax and spend that money on transportation. Anti-tax advocates have pointed out that since the tax is expected to raise $2 billion, that money has to come from some where. But, the hypothetical example they provide as a reason to avoid the sales tax is not particularly convincing. They suggest that you might buy a suit, but not get the tie to mathc. That doesn't sound right to me, and it doesn't sound right to the man on the street. If you ask the average person, they argue that it won't change what they buy at all. So how do you explain where the money comes from? One explanation is that 99% of the time basically no one thinks about a .5% sales tax, but there is a 1% chance that it is the straw that breaks the camel's back. That seems more plausible. Perhaps a better explanation is that most of the time people don't take the small increase into consideration, but by the end of the month they're a little bit short. So they buy less during the last week of the month. That seems reasonable and it has a very testable implication. After a sales tax increase, you should either see less spending during the fourth week of the month, or you should see more credit card spending during that month. (It would be very interesting to see if there is a difference between months with 31 days and February.) Since I havne't been able to find anyone who has done this test: I'm left with the following dilemma. My explanation of where the money goes is wrong,(Very plausible.), my search of the literature went awry (very plausible), or no one has done this test (not so plausible). Any thoughts? Yours, mitch
Re: VA sales tax question
I didn't ask my question very clearly. Sure, a sales tax shifts purchases. They want to raise 2 billion in Northern Virginia. That has to come from somewhere. And there will be leakage -- some people will be more inclined to buy off the net or in DE which has no sales tax. But, where will the money come from? Will people buy less each week? Will randomly select items to strike from their purchases? Or will they have difficulty at the end of the month. Again, I'm sorry that my question wasn't clear. mitch - Original Message - From: Fred Foldvary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, October 21, 2002 9:34 pm Subject: Re: VA sales tax question > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > If you ask the average person, they argue that it won't change > what > > they buy at all. > > A sales tax does shift purchases; some purchases will shift to out- > of-state > mail-order or nontaxed services. (Virginia does have a use tax, > but few > pay it, as I recall.) > > Fred Foldvary > > = > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: VA sales tax question
Nice link. mitch - Original Message - From: Arthur Woolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 8:19 am Subject: Re: VA sales tax question > I've got a non-technical paper on this issue. I looked at the > Vermont/New > Hampshire border. Until Vermont implemented a sales tax in 1969, > per > capita retail sales in the counties bordering the Connecticut > River in > Vermont and New Hamsphire were identical. Since then the Vermont > sales tax > has gone from 3% to 5%. New Hampshire's is 0%. Today, per capita > retail > sales are 60% higher on the NH side compared to the VT side. The > paper can > be accessed at http://www.vteconomy.com/Border.pdf > > > Art Woolf > > > > At 09:44 PM 10/21/02 -0400, you wrote: > >I didn't ask my question very clearly. Sure, a sales tax shifts > >purchases. They want to raise 2 billion in Northern Virginia. That > >has to come from somewhere. And there will be leakage -- some people > >will be more inclined to buy off the net or in DE which has no sales > >tax. > > > >But, where will the money come from? Will people buy less each week? > >Will randomly select items to strike from their purchases? Or will > >they have difficulty at the end of the month. > > > >Again, I'm sorry that my question wasn't clear. > > > >mitch > > > > > > > > ** > Arthur G. Woolf, Ph.D. > Associate Professor Economics > President, Vermont Council on Economic Education > www.bsad.uvm.edu/vcee339 Old Mill > University of Vermont > Burlington, VT 05405 > (802) 656-0190 or (802) 656-4711 > fax: (802) 656-8405 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >
Re: Emission Trading
Well, you might start with the symposium on SO2 trading in the Journal of Economic Perspectives in the Summer of 1998. Clear well written articles. Cropper and Oates have a pretty good survey article in the Journal of Economic Literature (1992). Mitch - Original Message - From: "Steffen Hentrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, February 17, 1997 4:17 pm Subject: Emission Trading > Dear Armchairs, > > does anybody know a comprehensive analysis of emisson trading > programms? I'm especially interested in effects of permits > distribution on competition. > > Greetings > > Steffen > >
Re: Foreign aid - can money buy love?
I don't think money buys love. We give a lot of money to Egypt, and it isn't clear that we get any love. We also give a ton of money to Israel and it isn't really clear that they feel closer to us than they would otherwise. m - Original Message - From: fabio guillermo rojas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, December 14, 2002 11:40 pm Subject: Foreign aid - can money buy love? > > Somebody said foreign aid might be justified if it increased the > securityof the US through supporting a steadfast ally. Has > anybody ever figured > out foreign aid trade offs? > > For example, > > What has the greatest effect on the annual number of American deaths > due to political violence (wars, terrorism, civil wars)? > > - $1 million spent on the army/navy/etc. > - $1 million given to the government of a foreign nation > - $1 million spent on covert forces > - $1 million spend on pro-American propaganda > > > Another question: how much do you have to spend to get a > dependable US ally? > > How much do you have to spend per person before 50% of a > population is > pro-US? > > What does the curve mapping per capita US foreign aid to % population > pro-US look like? > > Does money buy love? > > Fabio > > > >
Re: Car safety vs. Plane safety
But, that is not really what it means. Women might have more accidents per mile driven and still get a discount if they drive fewer miles. mitch - Original Message - From: "Bryan D Caplan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:28 pm Subject: Re: Car safety vs. Plane safety > "Robert A. Book" wrote: > > > > > Here are some more factors to consider in evaluating the > relative safety of planes vs. cars (maybe Saudi Arabia has the > right idea?): > > Another reason to be very skeptical: Auto insurance discounts for > women. 4000 actuaries can't be wrong! > > -- >Prof. Bryan Caplan > Department of Economics George Mason University >http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Mr. Banks: Will you be good enough to explain all this?! > > Mary Poppins: First of all I would like to make one thing > perfectly clear. > > Banks: Yes? > > Poppins: I never explain *anything*. > >*Mary Poppins* > >
