In a message dated 8/12/02 8:49:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I haven't read Tucker, but I've always thought that Von Mises is correct
when he says that the essential mark of socialism is that "one will alone,
acts, irrespective of whose will it is" (Human Action, p 695.) To me, this
"
In a message dated 8/12/02 8:48:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<
I don't know what the term "neoconservative" means, nor do I understand why
that particular label is relevant to this discussion. >>
I'm not sure that anyone knows what it means or rather, that there's any
common agreement
In a message dated 8/12/02 7:29:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Having just bought a new car, I disagree that compact cars look
"identical." The Honda Civic I settled on clearly "looks like" a Honda
Civic, and the Ford Focus and Hyundai Elantra I didn't buy each had its
own unmistakeable lo
In a message dated 8/12/02 5:57:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< One might also want a separate category of savings which excludes
non-reproducible assets such as paintings or land value, since, for example,
if the value of a painting rises, this is an increase in the net worth of the
owner,
--- Bryan Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"I enthusiastically recommend: Kraus, Malmfors, and
Slovic. 1992"
Sounds like a great article. K, M, & S aren't alone.
Here's some stuff from Rothman & Lichter's "Is
Environmental Cancer a Political Disease?" published
in the book "The Flight F
> << Or to rephrase in economic terms, risk averse managers prefer copying
> a proven strategy (low risk/low payoff) than engaging in R&D (high
> payoff/high risk).
> reduce drag coefficients to increase fuel economy. The summer I sold cars
> (1997 at a Pontiac-Mazda-Jeep-Eagle dealer) one of
>Economic income is consumption plus the change in >net worth (c.n.w.),
Not in national income and product accounts. It is current income minus consumption.
Current income does not include appreciation of assets. Further, if you want savings
to be equal to the flow of investment in the NIPA th
You can check the article but that is my memory (I'm at home now and can't check the
article myself). When they added capital gains in real estate and equities to the flow
of savings to get change in wealth they got high savings rates. - - Bill
William T. Dickens
The Brookings Institution
1775
Kevin Carson wrote:
> As for socialism, its defining characteristic is not necessarily the
absence
>of private property rights. Tucker simply defined socialism by two
>criteria: the beliefs that 1) all value was created by labor; and 2) that
>labor should get 100% of its product. In his view,
Kevin Carson wrote:
>>I haven't read the Pipes book. He's a neoconservative, isn't he?
I don't know what the term "neoconservative" means, nor do I understand why
that particular label is relevant to this discussion.
>I've read Bethell's book in parts, and skimmed through most of it. It
>st
Having just bought a new car, I disagree that compact cars look
"identical." The Honda Civic I settled on clearly "looks like" a Honda
Civic, and the Ford Focus and Hyundai Elantra I didn't buy each had its
own unmistakeable look. Even the new Toyota Corollas and Mazda Proteges
I've seen on the
In a message dated 8/12/02 4:18:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Or to rephrase in economic terms, risk averse managers prefer copying
a proven strategy (low risk/low payoff) than engaging in R&D (high
payoff/high risk).
Fabio >>
That certainly looked true toward the end of the 1980s, when
--- William Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> look at the question of whether savings rates are low if we define savings
> as change in wealth rather than income minus consumption.
Economic income is consumption plus the change in net worth (c.n.w.), so
Savings = income - consumption
Savings =
In a message dated 8/12/02 2:42:47 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< William Dickens wrote:
> Gale and Sabelhaus do not answer the question that you ask but they do
look at the question of whether savings rates are low if we define savings as
change in wealth rather than income minus cons
> That makes sense for the cars all made by the same company, or which
> share subcontractors. But Toyota, Honda, Subaru, and Ford all make cars
> with virtually the same shape and layout.
> Robin Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hanson.gmu.edu
Among management theory/organizational sociology
In a message dated 8/12/02 2:42:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<<
Wouldn't it be easier to produce cheap cars if all models were similar
to each other? Ie, you wouldn't need to retool for every model - just
make some cosmetic changes and keep the cost low? I think that was the
idea behind the
When I read this I thought that it must be wrong, since it is well
known that a sphere maximizes volume/area. However, if cars traveled
through tubes, this would be relevant. Cars, though, travel on
planar roads so that a square cross section does maximize interior
space. Longitudinal curvi
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
> Wouldn't it be easier to produce cheap cars if all models were similar
> to each other? Ie, you wouldn't need to retool for every model - just
> make some cosmetic changes and keep the cost low? I think that was the
> idea behind the Ford Escort
In a message dated 8/12/02 2:42:34 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< I recall buying a couple of houses in Silicon Valley:
put all your money down, plus whatever you could borrow
from relatives;add your income to see how much you
could afford to pay per month
and get an 80% mortgage based on th
Fabio wrote:
>Wouldn't it be easier to produce cheap cars if all models were similar
>to each other? Ie, you wouldn't need to retool for every model - just
>make some cosmetic changes and keep the cost low? I think that was the
>idea behind the Ford Escort first, then other cars like the Hyndais
>
I recall buying a couple of houses in Silicon Valley:
put all your money down, plus whatever you could borrow
from relatives;add your income to see how much you
could afford to pay per month
and get an 80% mortgage based on that; with the
seller accepting a second as the difference from
your d
Wouldn't it be easier to produce cheap cars if all models were similar
to each other? Ie, you wouldn't need to retool for every model - just
make some cosmetic changes and keep the cost low? I think that was the
idea behind the Ford Escort first, then other cars like the Hyndais
and Kia. These we
William Dickens wrote:
> Gale and Sabelhaus do not answer the question that you ask but they do look at
>the question of whether savings rates are low if we define savings as change in
>wealth rather than income minus consumption. They conclude that were (at least at the
>time of the arti
Hi Bryan,
There are at least two official government savings rates. My guess is that you
are referring to the individual savings rate from the National Income and Product
Accounts. For a very good description of how it is computed and its advantages and
shortcomings see Gale and Sabelhaus
I went shopping for a compact car recently, and discovered that they are
all quite similar - especially their physical shape. This seems remarkable
in light of how much cars have varied over the years, and how people
supposedly are willing to pay extra for a distinctive car. (And given how
s
Hummbut I still wonder if North was rights. Maybe we are not sharing
mental models...:-)
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin Carson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: North on ideology -- Free Markets, & Marketeers -- tunneli
I enthusiastically recommend:
Kraus, Malmfors, and Slovic. 1992. "Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and
Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks." *Risk Analysis* 12, pp.215-32.
This article parallels my findings on systematic belief differences
between economists and the public. It shows that similar sys
>From: "Alex Robson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Are you (and North?) saying that socialism (whose defining feature is the
>absence of private property rights) has been the natural state of
>affairs,
>and that private property rights are unnatural?
>
>If so, you might be interested to know that is
Excellent point. For example, the commons which existed under the manorial
system had at least as much claim to be "private" property as a joint-stock
corporation.
And any theory of private property should take into account that the Lockean
system (with absentee ownership, landlordism, etc.)
Interesting. Your remarks on tunnelling dovetail nicely with an excellent
article by Sean Corrigan at LewRockwell.com:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/corrigan/corrigan13.html
Corrigan refers to privatization, as part of IMF-imposed "structural
adjustments", as a carpet-bagger strategy for enabl
> I find this level of advice useful, but also frightening; I don't have even
> $10 000 to invest now, so maybe I'm better off staying out. Or just buy
> some ShareBuilder dollar cost averaging; not going to subscribe to a
> newsletter ...
> Tom Grey
For less than $10K, one can buy into a mutual
31 matches
Mail list logo
