In a message dated 8/28/02 11:18:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Another MVT deviation:
Personal bankrupcy law. I bet most voters would prefer more lenient
laws.
Fabio
Ironically, Todd J. Zywicki is presenting a paper at GMU Friday in which he
argues that people make less use of the
But I do have a naive question: Is there a median
voter for each issue, so that if there n issues, there
can be up to n median voters? Or, is there only one
median voter who satisfies the vector median as I
described above? Can such a person be proven to
exist, sort of like a voter
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
I think that applications of MVT are very, very sloppy. Four
criticisms:
1. You seem to assume that policy responds quite well to public
opinion. You assume that if opinion shifts, policy will quickly follow.
I believe that policy is very sticky with respect
there's
nothing rational about being ignorant towards a political system that
benefit others at the expence of oneself (or indeed benefit noone at
the expense of everyone).
It is rational to avoid doing something when the material cost to oneself is
greater than the material benefit,
Another MVT deviation:
Marijuana decriminalization
Fabio
In a message dated 8/28/02 2:02:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure, there is a little of this. But again, I doubt this matters much.
The Supreme Court held off New Deal legislation a little bit for a
couple of years, but after 4 years it caved in completely.
This must be one of the most
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
Another MVT deviation:
Marijuana decriminalization
The failure to decriminalize? 75-80% against according to Gallup. And
it hasn't really happened anywhere in the U.S. as far as I know, the
medical marijuana loophole aside. Which is incidentally a popular
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
Another MVT deviation:
Personal bankrupcy law. I bet most voters would prefer more lenient
laws.
They are already very lenient. There has been a lot of populist
resistance to creditors' tentative efforts to lobby to mildly tighten
them.
--
In a message dated 8/28/02 3:35:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Uh, how about the first income tax ever passed? It had super-majority
support in amendment form!
Congress passed the first federal income tax in 1861, without supermajority
support. If you'd asked the average Northern voter
In a message dated 8/27/02 12:19:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
4. Cognitive limitations: I'm no expert, but my hunch is that
many people are only willing to get worked up over a small
# of issues - taxes, abortion, immigration, defense... and
the dedicated might add their favorites like
I may be mistaken here, but don't public choice economists talk
about the
concept of rational ignorance to explain how small, concentrated
groups can
gain large focused benefits while spreading the costs in tiny pieces
across
the broader population?
They do - but it doesn't make
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
fabio guillermo rojas
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 9:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Median Voter and Sampling
So what are you getting at? Since there is a series of elections, each
with a different median voter
--- fabio guillermo rojas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4. Cognitive limitations: I'm no expert, but my hunch
is that many people are only willing to get worked up
over a small # of issues - taxes, abortion,
immigration, defense... and the dedicated might add
their favorites like gun control or
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
Any decent treatment of the MV states that it is the median *actual*
voter who matters, not the median *potential* voter. It's the Median
VOTER theorem, not the Median CITIZEN theorem, or the Median SENTIENT
BEING theorem.
I still think this is true but
In a message dated 8/26/02 6:33:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are several levels of puzzlement.
Puzzle #1: The median voter disapproves of existing policy.
Puzzle #2: The median voter, primary voters, and party activists ALL
disapprove of existing policy.
I don't think there are
--- fabio guillermo rojas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are other sources of non-median-voterness in
policy
Like the Supreme Court? Brown v. Board of Education
might be a good example. Of course it's not a
legislative body, so I'm out on a limb here.
Maybe there's also a cultural bias
16 matches
Mail list logo
