AW: Absolute vs. relative income level
> This does not contradict diminishing marginal utility. DMU > proposes that > for a given good, after some amount, extra amounts yield ever > diminishing > extra utility. My use of "contradiction" was misleading. Here I have no dissent to Fred. > If a particular threshold of income is needed in order to get > utility from > a good (i.e. having more than the neighbor), marginal utility > theory is not > contradicted but simply does not apply. > The implication is that after the > threshold, one > would strive to get more income until extra neighbor-beating > has the same > utility as extra other goods or extra leisure. My point is that justification of redistribution simply with the common argument of diminishing marginal returns of income over the complete range of income is not so convincing. Steffen
Absolute vs. relative income level
Dear armchairs, i think there is a at least partial contradiction between the hypothesis of diminishing marginal return of income and the hypothesis that people care about consuming more than their neighbors or about earning more than their neighbors (Frank: Luxury Fever). If the latter is true than the first hypothesis is weak. What do you think about this? Steffen
Bottle Deposits
Dear Armchairs, in germany we have a fierce political disput about efficency and environmental effectivity of legal imposition of bottle deposits. The government prefers a refund system and get support of regional breweries. But nationwide softdrink suppliers without a running refund systems resist. A german study claims that refund systems will displace returnable bottles. Furthermore new collection systems cost a lot of money and devaluate existing recycling systems for single-serving bottles. Environmental NGOs and German government wants a refund system because they are convinced of the notion of regionalisation because of minimisation of transport to better the environmental performance of softdrink industry. But regional breweries seem to use this notion to get a state-aided competitive advantage. What do you think about it? Everybody knows literature about that topic? Greetings, Steffen
Instruments for Traffic Policy
Dear Armchairs, I'm looking for a source of information about market instruments for traffic policy. Do you know experts, papers, books or web ressources about this topic? Thanks! Steffen - Steffen Hentrich The German Council of Environmental Advisors (SRU) Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety of the Federal Republic of Germany
Environmental and economic effects of Speed Limits
Dear Armchairs, I'm looking for recent studies of environmental and economic effects of speed limits. Who knows something about that topic? Steffen
Textbook Econometrics
Dear armchairs, I'm looking for a comprehensible and practical textbook in econometrics (beginners up to intermediate level)for self-study. Can you give me some recommendations. Thanks! Steffen
Credit rationing
Dear armchairs, i'm looking for a current review of capital market imperfection as an infant industry argument. Do you have any recommendations? Thanks, Steffen
RE: In Praise of Pay Toilets
I think it is good example for "bundling" or vertical integration. Like a free Microsoft Internet Explorer (see S. Landsburgs Slate column) the buyer is better off, if the seller offers two complementary goods like meals and toilets in a bundle than a seperate offer. If you are in a restaurant the barkeeper owns a kind of monopoly with regard to meals and a indoor toilet. Of course he can offer both seperatly and get a price where marginal revenue equals marginal costs. If he offers both together he can only charge a lower price (because marginal revenue goes up and thatswhy monopoly price goes down), but the buyer is better off and the restaurant gets more customers. Steffen
RE: entropy and sustainability
JP wrote: >Actually, no, here's a thought: in six >billion years, the sun will burn out, >making all research into stainability >and environmental / resource >economics a waste of time. There's an >obvious connection to entropy right >there. >-JP As long as environmental and resource economics take a direct influence on economic policy, productivity and welfare like other economic research you could your thought give an extension: ...making all research in economics a waste of time. Probably you don't know, but the connection of entropy and economy is still, obviously without relevance, a common concept in so called ecological economics, a field of research with huge influence in environmental policy, especially in Germany. Because I don't agree with that, I'm looking for profound arguments against that costly influence. Your comment is right, but for my audience probably not convincing. Steffen -Original Message- From: John Perich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 6:04 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: entropy and sustainability Well, Fred beat me to the punch here on the smart-aleck response. Unless you mean "entropy" as something other than the standard accepted definition - namely, a decrease in ordered energy on a thermodynamic level - then we can't help you. Actually, no, here's a thought: in six billion years, the sun will burn out, making all research into sustainability and environmental / resource economics a waste of time. There's an obvious connection to entropy right there. -JP >From: Fred Foldvary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: entropy and sustainability >Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 08:10:59 -0700 (PDT) > > > Dear armchairs, > > who among you knows something new about the consequence of entropy on > > sustainability and environmental/ressource economics (books, papers, >etc.)? > > Steffen > >I know something: any article on economics with the word "entropy" is >likely >to be nonsense, unless it itself declares such articles nonsense. > >Entropy says a closed system will dissipate into unavailable energy. >But the earth is not a closed system. It keeps getting solar energy, and >therefore the biomass and economic activity can increase indefinitely, so >long as the sun continues to shine. > >Fred Foldvary > > >= >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >__ >Do You Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax >http://taxes.yahoo.com/ -- I'm never gonna work another day in my life. The gods told me to relax; they said I'm gonna be fixed up right. I'm never gonna work another day in my life. I'm way too busy powertrippin', but I'm gonna shed you some light. - Monster Magnet, "Powertrip" _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
entropie and sustainability
Dear armchairs, who among you knows something new about the consequence of entropy on sustainability and environmental/ressource economics (books, papers, etc.)? Cheers! Steffen ~~~ Steffen Hentrich Research assistant: Environmental Economics Institute for Economic Research Halle Structural Change Department Kleine Maerkerstrasse 8 D-06108 Halle (Saale) GERMANY Tel.: ++ 49 345 7753 808 Fax: ++ 49 345 7753 820 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.iwh-halle.de/d/abteil/stwa/shh/pers.htm
RE: drink prices
Why do people not reject decisions, which with hindsight are unfavourable? The "drink order paradox" seems to be similar to the subject of following paper: "Illusion of Expertise in Portfolio Decisions: An Experimental Approach" GERLINDE FELLNER, WERNER GUETH, BORIS MACIEJOVSKY ABSTRACT: Overall, 72 subjects invest their endowment in four risky assets. Each combination of assets yields the same expected return and variance of returns. Illusion of expertise prevails when one prefers nevertheless the self-selected portfolio. After being randomly assigned to groups of four, subjects are asked to elect their "expert" based on responses to a prior decision task. Using the random price mechanism reveals that 64% of the subjects prefer their own portfolio over the average group portfolio or the expert's portfolio. Illusion of expertise is shown to be stable individually, over alternatives, and for both eliciting methods, willingness to pay and to accept. Keywords: Investment Decisions, Portfolio Selection, Overconfidence, Unrealistic Optimism, Illusion of Control, Endowment Effect http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=296121 Steffen -Original Message- From: Bryan D Caplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: drink prices Joel Simon Grus wrote: > (1) Where else do people buy things without knowing the price first? > (I've been thinking and have been unable to come up with any examples.) Hotel phone calls. Also, in restaurants people often order drinks before they see the menu. -- 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: Life Expectancy and Immigration
I think you can`t unlink both factors (genes/womb and country) because genetic defects and growth of embryo are partly affected by social and environmental circumstances of the country, carciogenic pollution and food, malnutrition or physical stress of the mother (hard work, etc.). Thatswhy I would suggest, that maximum live expectancy is independant from origin (see Nesse, Williamson: Why We Get Sick : The New Science of Darwinian Medicine)but average life expectancy is primary dependent on country of origin. Greetings from Halle(Germany) Steffen ~~~ Steffen Hentrich Research assistant: Environmental Economics Institute for Economic Research Halle Structural Change Department Kleine Maerkerstrasse 8 D-06108 Halle (Saale) GERMANY Tel.: ++ 49 345 7753 808 Fax: ++ 49 345 7753 820 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.iwh-halle.de/d/abteil/stwa/shh/pers.htm -Original Message- From: jim horsman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 3:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: 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? > -- The country is not the determining factor for life expectancy. Some immigrants live like the country of origin and presumably they would have life expectancies similar to said country. Some immigrants live like the host country and should have similar life expectancies. 2 caveats 1- genes matter 2- what happens in the womb is enormously important and must be taken into consideration.
AW: subsidies for renewable energies and the environment
Sorry about my bad english skills, but in germany I have not so much opportunities to speak english. "Exquilibrium" means simply equilibrium. A complete exploitation of exhaustable ressources takes place (in theory), if marginal user costs and marginal exploitation costs (ressource price) achieve marginal costs of back-stop-technologie (exploitation of renewables). Steffen > I think that this could only be if subsidies payed up to the exquilibrium > price of all exhaustable ressources. But this is not the case. Only a small > part of renewable energies gets subsidies and this not in all countries. > This implicates only a slow progress of back-stop-technologies and a > reduction of exquilibrium prices for exhaustible ressources. The theory of > exhaustible ressources predicts a lowering of marginal user costs and a > extraction path that cause a complete exploitation if marginal costs of > renewable will reached. I don't completely understand this paragraph since several sentences don't seem to make sense. (What is "exquilibrium"? Is that a typo of equilibrium? What does "marginal costs of renewable will be reached" mean? Reached by what?) >From what I can figure out, a subsidy on renewable resources has two effects. One, it reduces the total amount of exhaustable resources extracted over all time. Two, it shifts some of the remaining extraction closer in time to the present. So it's not clear that the subsidy is beneficial overall. Is that what you mean?
AW: subsidies for renewable energies and the environment
>How did you arrive at this conclusion? It seems to me that if you lower >the cost of renewable resources, that will result in less exhaustable >resources being extracted, since some of the exhaustable resources that >could previously be extracted profitably would now remain in the ground. I think that this could only be if subsidies payed up to the exquilibrium price of all exhaustable ressources. But this is not the case. Only a small part of renewable energies gets subsidies and this not in all countries. This implicates only a slow progress of back-stop-technologies and a reduction of exquilibrium prices for exhaustible ressources. The theory of exhaustible ressources predicts a lowering of marginal user costs and a extraction path that cause a complete exploitation if marginal costs of renewable will reached. >Clearly that's the ideal policy, but if it's not possible to have >polluters pay the social cost (which is sometimes the case), is it a good >idea to subsidize less-polluting alternatives? Since that can reduce >the total amount of pollution, I think the answer is yes, as long as the >cost of the subsidies is lower than the benefit of reduced pollution. Indeed subsidies can be equivalent solution to the polluter pay principle. This depends on what is the cheapest way to prevent pollution (Coase). But I think, that this is not the point here. If you want to prevent pollution the best way is to tax or subsidies pollution, not oil or clean technologies. Steffen
AW: subsidies for renewable energies and the environment
Thatswhy my suggestiv question: Is there a sufficient reason for renewable energy subsidies? Steffen
