--- Michael Etchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
CongressCritter does is to decide what to do not
about, say, farm subsidies generally, but about
SB1234, sponsored by Sen. This and Sen. That, which
goes through specific committees with specific
members...
So the farm bill never went to the floor
Fred Foldvary wrote:
Does the typical American agree, for example, that it is good
policy to spend billions on farm subsidies, or are they just ignorant and
apathetic?
I don't know of any survey evidence on this exact question, but
protection and industrial policy to save jobs are very
In the real world we have almost 600 in Congress, dealing with
innumerable matters more or less simultaneously. One of the things each
CongressCritter does is to decide what to do not about, say, farm
subsidies generally, but about SB1234, sponsored by Sen. This and Sen.
That, which goes
Hi,
I have now had opportunity to go through your mail thoroughly, and I would
just like to say thank you. I'm trying to flesh out an idea for a further
function bulk discounts may serve in illegal markets, and I really
appreciate your help. Your mail was most useful.
Ole
At 21:37
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
Carl Close wrote:
Here's an interesting interview that may prompt some discussion
Next time could you put it in plain text so that the mail client treats
it as a link? Or, if you must send HTML mail, make it a proper link
yourself? Or refrain from putting the meat in size -3?
--
Anton
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
fabio guillermo rojas wrote:
. . . lobbiests (sp?) . . .
Since you ask: lobbyists.
`y' changes to `i' before `-est' (superlative) and `-(e)th' (ordinal)
but not before `-ist' (agent).
--
Anton Sherwood, http://www.ogre.nu/
athier than thou
The implication that those who believe in the historical accuracy of the
Bible are ignorant was inappropriate, Alex.
Lynn
-Original Message-
From: Alex Tabarrok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 11:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Republican Reversal
I tried to send the to the list earlier, but it has not
gone through according to my records. If this is a repeat message, I
apologize.
"There is no such thing as free blood."
See this story below from The Charlotte Observer.
Lynn Gray wrote:
The implication that those who believe in the historical accuracy of the
Bible are ignorant was inappropriate, Alex.
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
--- Alex wrote:
Yes, I believe that the majority of the American public supports
farm subsidies.
Why do corporations, lawyers, unions, and other interests provide candidates
and elected representatives with millions of dollars of funds and favors if
they just vote to satisfy the median
Actually, if you read closely, you will see that I implied that
Americans who believe that God created human beings pretty much the way
they are now about 10,000 years ago are *not* ignorant.
The remarks were appropriate because they address the issue under
discussion. As
By saying it was inappropriate I meant it was rude. I am aware of the weight
of the evidence in regard to human evolution. However, to say that those who
believe in Biblical creation are dumb/ignorant is at the very least less
than good manners.
Lynn
-Original Message-
From: Robin
Fred Foldvary wrote:
...if the typical American favors subsidies to sugar farmers and
does not mind if the domestic price is over twice the world price, and does
not care much if candy-making jobs are moving to Canada, why do sugar farmers
contribute funds to candidates if the representatives
Gray, Lynn wrote:
By saying it was inappropriate I meant it was rude. I am aware of the
weight of the evidence in regard to human evolution. However, to say
that those who believe in Biblical creation are dumb/ignorant is at
the very least less than good manners.
Worse than saying the same
--- Alex wrote:
Yes, I believe that the majority of the American public supports
farm subsidies.
to which Fred Foldvary replied:
Why do corporations, lawyers, unions, and other interests provide
candidates and elected representatives with millions of dollars of funds
and favors if they
Alex Tabarrok:
The evidence is even stronger in other fields that information per-se
often does not change people's minds. . . .
If information doesn't change people's minds - what does?
You do notice, I trust, that just as there are those, including some who
appear to be well-educated and
Yes, this is precisely my point.
Alex
Michael Etchison wrote:
Alex Tabarrok:
The evidence is even stronger in other fields that information per-se
often does not change people's minds. . . .
If information doesn't change people's minds - what does?
You do notice, I trust, that just as
19 matches
Mail list logo
