OK, I didn't open it -- so what does it say?
I went to the web site referenced, but didn't see an obvious
path. I like the idea of having more files on a server; maybe
Professor Bryan Caplan's Armchair File Cabinet?
I guess I missed the fireworks between the Austrian Economists and
Bryan, who
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
The question, Where should I go to Graduate School? is a common one on
the armchair list. In May of 2000, before the list was archived, there
was an extensive discussion of this question under the subject heading
Graduate Studies. There were some very thoughtful responses that
deserve to be
How about taxing leisure; which would induce people to work more (or leave)?
- Original Message -
From: Kristjan Kanarik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:20 AM
Subject: Tax with positive growth effect
Has anybody read/heard about a tax which
I am not an economist, but I do happen to know a fair amount
about graduate school (I've been in two and my dissertation is
on higher education):
1) Unless you have a good reason, go to the best/highest prestige
school that will accept you. Why? Prestige/repuation tends
to correlate with things
Holding spending constant, it is certainly true that some taxes are
better for growth than other taxes. To summarize a large literature
taxes on capital tend to be very bad for growth because of positive
externalities associated with capital, taxes on income are better and
something like a
--- Kristjan Kanarik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anybody read/heard about a tax which does have a positive
effect on economic growth?
Yes. Land-value taxation promotes growth by having less excess
burden, and by inducing more productive use of suboptimally used
land.
You could also force
Well before yo tax idle land, you must be sure that the land is
wasted, and that his owner for some planetary reasons does not want to
invest on it. And, believe me, this is something which has been always very
difficult to assess. Some times you get otherways perverse outcomes. The big
question
In the following example, it isn't the taxing itself that promotes growth,
but its spending.
If a state uses tax money to attract rich tourists to the area (by
advertising, for example), that could promote consumption, in such a way
that the tax promotes growth more than it hampers it.
--- 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
10 matches
Mail list logo
