Re: SUVs
Don't see why they wouldn't. I mean, they're proven to lower death/injury rates resulting from collisions. Economic theory would have to say yes. But no, I haven't seen a formal study on this. If you think of a way to go about it let me know. -Bill William M. Butterfield Analyst MultiState Assoc. Inc. Phone: (703) 684-1110 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bubblemania
Thanks for the accurate data. Elsewhere, I have read that the pre-war baby bust began in the mid-1920's--before the great depression--and so could not have been entirely a result of the difficult times of the '30's. If it isn't too much trouble, can you either confirm or disconfirm this claim?~Alypius In a message dated 1/26/03 8:02:08 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (demographically, the boom began in 1943) The fertility rate (measured per 1000 women) in 1943 barely exceeded that of 1942 (2,718 v. 2,628), follwed by declines in 1944 (2,568) and 1945 (2,491), only a bit higher than the rates of 1941 (2,301) and 1940 (2,301). In 1946, however, the rate rose to 2,943 and thereafter remained above 3,000 through 1964 (3,208) and then again in 1965 (2,928), 1966 (2,736), 1967 (2,573), 1968 (2,477), and 1969 (2,465). I've generally heard demographers to include the years 1946-1964 in the Baby Boom, although one might arguably include 1965 or exclude 1946. The Baby Boom stands out even more starkly if one uses live birth rates per 1,000 women: the number doesn't exceed 100 until 1946, and then does so every year through 1964, after which it again falls below 100. (Source: Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Part I, pp. 51-53.) DBL
Re: SUVs
the best piece I have seen on these issues is in Regulation. Here http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv24n1/coate.pdf 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: Bubblemania
In a message dated 1/30/03 8:30:04 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Thanks for the accurate data. Elsewhere, I have read that the pre-war baby bust began in the mid-1920's--before the great depression--and so could not have been entirely a result of the difficult times of the '30's. If it isn't too much trouble, can you either confirm or disconfirm this claim?~Alypius Historical Statistics contains fertility and birth rates going back only to 1940. Looking at live births (the data on which go back to 1909), the number seems to have risen more or less steadily from about 2.7 million in 1909 to 3 million in 1914 and then stayed around 3 million through about 1926, when it began to tail off to about 2.6 million in 1929 and finally down to 2.3 million in 1933. The number stayed around 2.3-2.4 million through 1937, and then around 2.5 million through 1940. It rose for the following three years: 2.7, 3.0 and 3.1. For 1944 the number fell back to around 2.9, and then rose to 3.4 in 1946, the first (and lowest) year of the Baby Boom. The number rose to over 4 million for the years 1955 through 1964, and even in 1965-1970 (the last year of the data in the Bicentenial edition of Historical Statistics) always remained about 3.5 million. DBL
trend grading policies
I believe this is topical; it was sparked by the pronoucement of the grading policy for an economics course by an economics professor on this list. He said that if one gives better grades to those who do well in the end of the semester, one simply discriminates against those who work hard at the beginning of the semester rather than those who work hard at the end of the semester. This seems to be true only in the case of those courses which do not build on the material taught at the beginning of the course. For instance, a foreign language course which taught you sets of nouns each week. On the other hand, a foreign language course which taught you verbs the first week, how to conjugate them the second week, and required you to use them in complex sentences the third week would be fundamentally different. If someone were to do well the third week and not the first, they would have learned more than someone who did well the first week and not the third. This is because knowledge of the first week is required to do well in the third. I hope the particular economics course, industrial organization, is of the second type. If so, trend grading would be worthwhile. By trend grading I mean weighting assignments late in the semester heavier or bumping up grades if students are improving. Furthermore, my unsupported assertion is that all classes that are both worthwhile and interesting are of the second type. Patrick McCann p.s. this is less of an attempt to change the policy than to defend the policies of other professors who were criticized so harshly.
Re: trend grading policies
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope the particular economics course, industrial organization, is of the second type. If so, trend grading would be worthwhile. By trend grading I mean weighting assignments late in the semester heavier or bumping up grades if students are improving. Furthermore, my unsupported assertion is that all classes that are both worthwhile and interesting are of the second type. Patrick McCann p.s. this is less of an attempt to change the policy than to defend the policies of other professors who were criticized so harshly. This is a good point. But it can be handled by giving the midterm less weight to begin with. You have an argument for giving a midterm a lower weight, but not a variable weight. And I do give the midterm lower weight. -- 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*
Economic anamolies and Kuhn
I'm teaching a course on the sociology of science and we read Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions. FYI, Kuhn says that science is characterized by paradigms - most science works from basic assumptions justified by model achievements. Scientific change occurs when anamolies - observations contradicting theory - undermine the paradigm and new ideas are adopted. Can someone provide me an example of an anamoly from the recent history of economics that led to a fundamental change in economic theory? Fabio
Re: Economic anamolies and Kuhn
Assymetric information? Lemon car markets whatnot? (Signalling models?) How fundamental is fundamental? There is a game theory text that assumes a certain amount of irrational behavior to obtain its results. I can search the closet if you want. Sorry I'm not more helpful, jsh --- fabio guillermo rojas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm teaching a course on the sociology of science and we read Kuhn's structure of scientific revolutions. FYI, Kuhn says that science is characterized by paradigms - most science works from basic assumptions justified by model achievements. Scientific change occurs when anamolies - observations contradicting theory - undermine the paradigm and new ideas are adopted. Can someone provide me an example of an anamoly from the recent history of economics that led to a fundamental change in economic theory? Fabio __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
