Mankiw is taking a lot of heat for suggesting that there's a positive link
between "offshoring" and growth:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30194-2004Feb10.html
on 2/11/04 12:30 PM, TerBush, Thomas at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Particularly after 3+ months of nonstop scaremonger
I am, the 12% pro-outsourcing response is much higher than I'd expect!
on 2/11/04 11:55 AM, Bryan Caplan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm not the least surprised by these results:
>
> http://poll.excite.com/poll/home.jsp?cat_id=1
> --
> Prof. Bryan Caplan
> Department of Economics George
on 9/5/03 4:14 PM, Robert A. Book at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What if you broke into a store at night and stole a piano -- but that
> as not to avoid purchase, i.e. you would not have purchased it anyway
> at the set price?
>
> Would that be OK?
Totally different, as you say below. I'm talkin
I'm thinking mostly about the growth in the size and scope of the federal
government under Republican administrations versus Democratic ones. In
their rhetoric Republicans often support the free market, but in their
actions they rarely seem to do so. You gave an example of Quayle being a
voice of
ion a
contract between buyer and seller. I guess they now have EULAs and such
with some media, but not others.
on 9/5/03 3:56 PM, Fred Foldvary at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Steve Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Another example: copying under fair use can reduce royaltie
Unless he sells it or gives it away! The question is, is the CD/book/etc.
itself my property or not? Or am I agreeing by buying it that I can only
use the media in a very limited way?
on 9/5/03 3:53 PM, Fred Foldvary at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> A uniform rule is needed that applies to everyo
That still avoids my distinction between rhetoric and policy.
on 9/5/03 3:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 9/4/03 11:03:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> here I have to disagree with you Steve. :) The Republican party's ideology
> runs from classical
Are you asking how to separate the effect of immigration from other factors
that would increase productivity?
on 9/5/03 2:27 PM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> The point is that in the case of immigrants' wages it is not just a
>> transfer, but a net gain.
>
> If it is a net ga
on 9/5/03 3:27 PM, Robert A. Book at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But
> wholesale copying to avoid purchase is definitely infringement, even
> if no money changes hands.
What if it was not to avoid purchase, i.e. I would not have purchased it
anyway at the set price? Copying at one's own expense st
I would only pay the kid so far as he forced me to pay, and even then I
would find a way to pay as little as possible. But I wouldn't deny my
neighbor's right to own and maintain a lawn at his own expense.
on 9/5/03 2:14 PM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Because *we,* the citizen
I seem to remember Bart and Lisa Simpson arguing over whether or not two
wrongs make a right. BTW, Homer agrees with you. ;-) Call me naive, but
I'm on Lisa's side.
I guess that's where I'd ultimately disagree with Magneto, too.
on 9/5/03 3:19 PM, Aschwin de Wolf at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
Conversely, I could argue that all of the music I've ever downloaded from a
P2P network was fair use, since it did not reduce royalties. Why? All I
have to do is claim that I would have never purchased the music at the
market price.
on 9/5/03 3:08 PM, Steve Miller at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
osoft Office and burn a backup disc. The original is damaged. Suppose
that without the backup I made, I would have purchased another original.
Again, royalties are reduced by fair use.
Steve
on 9/5/03 2:47 PM, Fred Foldvary at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> --- Steve Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
on 9/5/03 12:40 PM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Now, I realize
> *someone* will benefit, just as some people would benefit if our government
> decided to launch a full scale invasion of Communist China, but what numbers
> would we look at--average incomes, unemployment rates, crim
Why is it better for U.S. citizens to benefit than for an immigrant to
benefit? Are U.S. citizens somehow more deserving? Does their increased
wealth "count" more?
on 9/5/03 12:40 PM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Alright, I understand how the immigrant benefits by making more
So do public/university libraries fundamentally violate intellectual
property rights? Is widespread sharing theft, or is some form of durable
duplication necessary for a theft to have taken place? Is copying alone an
act of theft, or only when the copy is distributed? I wish I had answers.
The cu
on 9/4/03 3:02 PM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I thought the implication here was so obvious it did not need to be spelled
> out, but I guess I was mistaken (jab, jab). Importing new voters from very
> unlibertarian political cultures will further diminish, if not eventually
>
on 9/4/03 8:26 AM, Aschwin de Wolf at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Illegals knowingly break federal law. Many libertarians say they only break
>laws that shouldn't exist anyway. But this made me wonder. The overwhelming
>majority of illegal immigrants do not have libertarians views (to put it
>mildl
on 9/4/03 3:03 AM, alypius skinner at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>What I want to know is whether the labor economists' studies take into
>account the cost of the immigrants' crime rates (which are above the native
>born average), their welfare dependency (again, above the national average),
>and the
19 matches
Mail list logo
