Re: Jimmy Carter and oil prices
The only bright spot in the whole dreadful 10-15 years of petroleum and gas price control era is that even the liberal pols no longer lunge for controls (price) in response to price spikes. Nixon didn't eliminate price control authority on petroleum when he administratively abolished the wage-price control program in 1972 and in fact used it to allocate propane; Congress seize on this "loop hole" and turned it into legislatively imposed controls in 1973-74 in the "embargo" hysteria. Ford in 1975 could have vetoed (and sustained it) extension of the program, ridding us of controls, the immoral allocation machinery, high prices and shortages, but blinked and let the extension take place. Carter not only carried on the program, but went on to create over 40 plus categories of natural gas for regulatory purposes, even though he promised to decontrol gas in the 76' campaign. It's hard for me to believe a counter factual story that the Carter administration and Congressional democrats would have willingly returned the petroleum and gas industry to the private sector. Remember, it was the moral equivalent of war, although ironically the gas lines in the late 70's probably contributed to their electoral defeat. Reagan just knocked it in the head--done, gone, finished, end of story, hello $10 oil, although it took longer to get the natural gas situation straightened out and usher in the decade long price control induced "gas bubble", incidentally making it possible to say goodby to the $10 mcf budding "synfuels" boondoggle. Oh yes, not ever thing turned out rosey--we still need to get back to work on a plan for "Energy Independence" starting with corn fed fuel and limitless incentives for "renewables". As Hans Landsberg wrote at the time "Anyone Want to Play Energy Policy?" Rodney Weiher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From "Rethinking Carter" by William L. Anderson [Posted October 25, 2000] Posted at http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=535id=68 by the Von Mises Institute "First, he announced gradual decontrol of oil prices and the phasing out of the Keystone-Cops like government allocation system. However, Carter also pushed a "Windfall Profits Tax" on the belief that decontrol would bring higher prices and, thus, higher profits to oil companies that "really don't deserve them." The Wall Street Journal so opposed Carter's oil tax that it published an editorial, "Death of Reason," on the day Congress passed the tax, bordering the editorial in black. Full decontrol was scheduled to take place in the spring of 1981, but Reagan upon taking office lifted controls almost immediately, thus receiving credit for what was mostly the action of his predecessor. While Carter was mistaken in his belief that decontrol would automatically increase oil profits (many investors also made the same error), one must also recognize the political heat he took for his actions, especially from the left. Ralph Nader, who had endorsed Carter as a "breath of fresh air" just four years earlier, denounced oil decontrol as "the greatest anti-consumer action of this century" and predicted $600 a barrel oil by 1990."
Re: Siberia and Canada
Maybe look at migration of the Northern tier US states and put in a climate variable. Except for those getting out of the concentration camps and leaving the economically unsustainable post-communist communities, I wonder how strong the climate variable is in Russian migration. Casual conversation with some Russians suggest it might not be that great. Rodney Weiher Bryan Caplan wrote: With the collapse of internal migration restrictions, Russians are leaving Siberia for warmer locales in the south and big cities. No big surprise there. Question: If there were free migration between the U.S. and Canada, would Canada lose a lot of population to California, Florida, and other more desirable locations? -- Prof. Bryan Caplan Department of Economics George Mason University http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] I hope this has taught you kids a lesson: kids never learn. --Chief Wiggum, *The Simpsons*
Re: Economist IQ?
Why not look at GRE scores (or do they still require GREs?) Rodney Weiher Stephen Miller wrote: I doubt anyone has hard data on this, but I'm wondering what people on this list would guess is the average IQ of Ph.D. economists? Would it be much different from the average IQ of Ph.D.s in general?
Re: A deep look at media bias
Rex, I agree in general, but the fish example is a little misplaced. A few Individual Transferable Quotas--ITQs exist in US fisheries and there are many more proposals to extend their use in over harvested (most of them) US fisheries. New Zealand has an extensive system. They are an example of market-based management of open access resources. These do get reported in the popular media from time to time, but usually only after our friend Senator Stevens (Alaska) turns them down. rex wrote: I've seen many stories about government attempts to stop price gouging and none even hinted that there was another side, that gouging was good, that anti-gouging laws shouldn't exist, that they defeat market pricing, or that the laws caused problems. I've seen many stories about seafood being overharvested and need more government laws to limit takes, and never seen any mention that the problem was government ownership of water, defeating supply and demand incentives, soggy socialism, and the need for private property rights that would enable farming and market pricing. (if that wasn't bad enough I rarely see stories on farming of seafood, and they NEVER make the tie in to the lack of property rights in water that cause overharvesting in government water. It is unfortunate that (I believe) even the seafood farmers can't make the tie in, coming from government schools). I have never seen a seafood farmer on land suggest that he should be able to own areas now owned by government in order to farm in water owned by government, I have never seen a reporter ask such a question). I've seen many stories about water conservation and watering restrictions even including police state patrols and enforcement, and never seen even a hint that the problem was government ownership, lack of competition, lack of market pricing, defeating supply and demand, that would eliminate all the coverage made by the reporter in his socialist story. those are 3 easy ones I see a lot. I could go on and on. You've inspired me to ask the list serve participants to compile a collection. Please send in more examples of media blindness about capitalism, free market economics, pricing, property rights, which all prove that the first amendment is incompatible with government schools, and the latter must end. I swear it seems our schools accomplish exactly what soviet schools accomplished. the media prove that government schools produce socialists who know nothing about free market economics.
Re: [Forum] Quoth who?
Posner's article on economic regulation distinguished it from social regulation, which is still a separate and largely unexplained phenomenon. See Jonathan Wiener "On the Political Economy of Global Environmental Regulation", Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 87, #3 (February 1999). Alex Tabarrok wrote: > > >The idea, called "regulatory capture" is associated with George >Stigler. Posner's paper "Theories of Economic Regulation," Richard >Posner, Bell Journal of Economics and management science, Vol. 5, No. 2, >pp. >335-358, 1974. brought the idea ought very clearly as I recall but I am >not aware of that quote in either. > >Alex > -- Alexander Tabarrok Department of Economics, MSN 1D3 George Mason University Fairfax, VA, 22030 Tel. 703-993-2314 Web Page: http://mason.gmu.edu/~atabarro/ and Director of Research The Independent Institute 100 Swan Way Oakland, CA, 94621 Tel. 510-632-1366
Re: Emission Trading
Denny Ellerman and his colleagues at MIT pretty much have the franchise on this issue. See Markets for Clean Air: The US Acid Rain Program, Cambridge University Press, 2000. Steffen Hentrich wrote: 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: University overhead
As a purchaser of university research, we often bargain with the PI on overhead, who in turn must bargain with their administration. Rodney Weiher fabio guillermo rojas wrote: Do universities compete over the overhead they charge? For example, when wooing senior faculty, is it ever the case that universities offer lower overhead for big projects? Fabio
Re: Return to Education and IV
Just a note on discount rates. The late sociologist Ed Banfield had an entire theory of poverty, education, crime, and in general, class distinction based not on income but on discount rates, e.g. higher rates, less education, more crime, lower-class behavior. It was very intuitive in terms of a lot of observed behavior but I don't believe he explained well how how you empirically measure individual discount rates Seems the name of the book was The Unheavenly City. He was influential early on in the Nixon administration. Rodney Weiher Bryan Caplan wrote: William Dickens wrote: As I remember the standard neo-classical answer to this is that the main source of endogenaity isn't ability bias but discount rate bias - - that people with below average discount rates get more schooling. I hadn't thought of that (or heard it). Is there actually any evidence on discount rates and educational attainment? We both know there is a lot of evidence on ability (IQ) and educational attainment. High estimated returns to education are usually claimed to be evidence of credit market imperfections. It seems that the welfare implications are quite different if the real problem is high discount rates. So if the question you want to know is the effect of attending high school vs. only going through the 11th grade for the average person the return appears lower if you don't take into account that the average discount rate of people who drop out at 11 is much higher than the average discount rate of those who finish high school. - - 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] 10/16/02 02:13PM I've occasionally heard that instrumental variables (IV) estimators of the return to education yield markedly higher estimates than OLS. Is this true? And how can this make any intuitive sense? If IV is correcting for endogeneity, you would expect things to go the other way. Why? With a medical treatment, you would expect endogeneity to understate the benefit, because sicker people are more likely to voluntarily seek treatment. But with education, you would expect endogeneity to overstate the benefit, because able people are more likely to voluntarily enroll. -- 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* -- 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*
Re: Republican Reversal
You mean He didn't? Rodney Weiher Alex Tabarrok wrote: Yes, I believe that the majority of the American public supports farm subsidies. The rational ignorance assumption fails to explain this - it's not like the information that governments spends billions on the farmers is hard to find. Some combination of Bryan's rational irrationality and just plain irrationality explains the results much better. Forty four percent of the American public thinks that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so. (November 1997, Gallup Poll) so why should we be surprised that many Americans also support farm subsidies? 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: Life Expectancy and Immigration
Walt, I visited some weapons plants in the 1970'. Since then I've had foot problems and lately haven't felt as alert as I did in those days.. Can I get in on the compensation? Rodney Weiher Warnick, Walter wrote: Even with data, the analysis will be confounded by immigrants' self-selection. Is it reasonable to expect that the life expectancy of immigrants is representative of the population of the country they are leaving? Or, instead, might they be a healthier (or unhealthier) subset of that population? Data that show that immigrants live longer, on average, than the population they left behind might be little related to the life expectancy of the receiving country. The Department of Energy has long faced a closely related problem. Former employees at weapons plants contend that their health was impaired by hazards of their working environment. They demand compensation. It is incontrovertible, however, that, on average, their health is superior to that of the general population. So, are we to conclude that a little radiation is good for health (hormesis); are we to conclude that whatever the adverse effect on health might have been, it was small; or are we to conclude that the original selection for employment required that the applicants meet threshhold conditions of healthiness, so that comparisons with the general population are confounded? Grappling with this issue, the Clinton Administration determined to award $100,000 to former employees of the weapons plants. Walt Warnick -Original Message- From: Bryan D Caplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 6:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Life Expectancy and Immigration Bahizi_P wrote: Country of destination would be the answer. Not to be critical, but do you have any data, or is this just your best guess? Life expectancy has a lot to do with access to a myriad of services primary available in developed countries (where life expectancy is greater) such as: -medical services and treatment (Proper diagnosis and so on) -presence (or lack thereof) of highly and deadly contagious diseases -proper nutrition -proper mental health care (anxiety and stress due to environment, i.e. political unrest) Lifespan is also related to: -better information -and overall better quality of life The reverse would also true. A person going from a country with high life expectancy to one with a shorter lifespan and adopting the locals way of life, i.e. exposure to diseases, malnutrition, etc, would have their lifespan considerably shortened. My 2c worth. Pierre Bahizi [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Bryan Caplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Life Expectancy and Immigration Life expectancy varies widely between countries. When someone moves to a new country, what best predicts their lifespan? Country of origin? Or country of destination? -- Prof. Bryan Caplan Department of Economics George Mason University http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] He was thinking that Prince Andrei was in error and did not see the true light, and that he, Pierre, ought to come to his aid, to enlighten and uplift him. But no sooner had he thought out what he should say and how to say it than he foresaw that Prince Andrei, with one word, a single argument, would discredit all his teachings, and he was afraid to begin, afraid to expose to possible ridicule what he cherished and held sacred. Leo Tolstoy, *War and Peace* -- Prof. Bryan Caplan Department of Economics George Mason University http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Who are they? Why are they running? Could they be coming to me? Really coming to me? And why? To kill me? *Me* whom everyone loves? Leo Tolstoy, *War and Peace*
Re: Photographers
I'm not a pro, but what are those brown strips of film that have impressions like the pictures you had developed that come back from Ritz when you get the pics? Burns, Erik wrote: relatedly, how will this change (or has this changed?) given the fact that you can get a fairly good quality digital scan of a photo for a relatively low price - and reprint it from the file (or by rescanning) ad infinitum at no additional cost? seems that as the scanning/digitalization process improves, professional photographers will have an added incentive to sell you the negatives rather than keep a library of negatives (which must also entail a cost) in hopes you'll be back for more later. etb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alex Tabarrok Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Photographers Whenever I get a professional photograph I am always infuriated that the photographers keep the negatives and then charge me every time I want a print. This wouldn't be so bad but the system is inefficient since I move around a lot and can lose track of who holds the negatives to photographs that I had taken 10 years ago. I have tried several times to arrange an alternative deal - paying more up front in return for the negatives - but the photographers always react with horror to this suggestion and refuse. I have a two part question. First, why do photographers want the system this way. (Note that obviously the photographers have a monopoly over the prints once the prints are taken but that this does not really answer the question - see Landsburgh's discussion of the popcorn problem in The Armchair Economist.) Second and relatedly why don't entrants offer an alternative system? 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: Only Economists Tell the Truth?
Armchairers, You might want to check out the extensive literature on so-called direct techniques such as contingent valuation and conjoint analysis that is used in environmental economics to elicit quantitative estimates of willingness-to-pay for non-market, non-use goods. Quantitative results are generally comparable (although higher) than those obtained from indirect methods such as travel cost models and they are now accepted in courts of law. They did, however, get a bad name in the Exxon Valdeze case, where the products of sleepy academics suddenly took on enormous importance in terms of dollars changing hands. Even Solow and Arrow and Paul Portney at RFF have looked at this subject and said the WTP (or Willingness-to-accept) estimates pass muster with the academic community, if the estimates are cut in half. Rodney Weiher NOAA Chief Economist Alex Tabarrok wrote: Here is another reason, that just occured to me, why survey questions may not help us as much as we would like even on those questions where they are relevant. In economics we are typically interested in what matters at the margin and this may be difficult to discover in a survey question. Take Robin's question about why people go to school. The answer could truthfully be because my friends are going/because my father said I should etc. while at the same time it could be also be true that an increase in the wage rate reduces the number of people going to school. It seems to me that this may be difficult to pick up in survey questions though I suppose we could ask questions like - What factors would raise the probability that you would attend/not attend school? - this sort of counter-factual, however, is a more difficult question to answer than the factual about why you did what you did but the answer to the latter question is an average while we are interested in the marginal. Alex P.S. Yes, economists are inconsistent. -- 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]
