from
observed aggregate correlations.
Cheers,
M. Christopher Auld phone: 403.220.4098
Assistant Professor fax: 403.282.5262
Economics, University of Calgaryemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Calgary, Alberta, Canadaweb: http://jerry.ss.ucalgary.ca
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Dimitriy V. Masterov wrote:
I don't have an answer for you, but it seems important to point out that
not all lotteries have a negative expected payoff. Large, multi-state
jackpots are often a fair bet, even after taxes.
How does that come about?
Cheers,
M. Christopher
Well, for professionals under NAFTA there already is more or less free
migration. My casual impression is that most migration which does
actually occur is retirement to certain areas in the southern US
(snowbirds). Further immigration leniency would be unlikely to have
large effects. Recall
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Bryan Caplan wrote:
That seems to water down the Principle to complete irrelevance, doesn't
it?
Well, the notion that life is very unlikely, but happened on earth
through sheer chance, does not require that earth is special in
any fundamental physical sense.
If it says
I don't see why any of the usual motivations would
be competed away, if they're true:
- up-or-out contracts efficient in presence of certain
forms of asymmetric information
- gives senior faculty incentive to hire junior faculty
better than they are
- academic freedom provided would cost
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, john hull quotes Mario Bunge:
In short, THE USE OF UTILITY FUNCTIONS IS OFTEN
MATHEMATICALLY SLOPPY AND EMPIRICALLY UNWARRANTED.
It is an interesting regularity that some non-economists -- particularly
philosophers and physicists, and Bunge is both -- seem to think even
Suppose that some behavior is affected by information provided by official
sources. Suppose further that by distorting or withholding information
the official may change behavior in a socially desirable manner (ignore
credibility issues). Should the official engage in such manipulations?
To
I don't see how the article can be interpreted as not attacking
econometric methods. The article starts off by referring to such methods
as junk science, follows by arguing that econometricians can obtain any
result they wish by arbitrary manipulations, and finishes with a lament
that
