-
"By denying consistent behaviour Mr. Armstrong no doubt makes the theory more realistic, but at the same time he destroys much of its usefulnes" How would you make the tradeoff between realism and usefulness? Or wait, how can something be less realistic but more useful.....
-
This is the only conclusion I can reach after reading this . In it Friedman argued that the greenspan era showed that the federal reserve "have the technical abilty to maintain stable prices". Since this article was in 2006, I can only assume that the events of the next few years (had Friedman been alive) exposed the folly of average price
-
So Caplan says: " What about the theorem - that Rothbard dismissed - which claims that utility-maximizing individuals equalize the marginal utilities of goods consumed divided by their prices? Doesn't this show that neoclassicals believe in cardinal utility? No, it does not; statements made in technical jargon often sound absurd if you forget
-
I see what you are saying. I just find all health economics so confusing. Take for example this quote from a paper that has recently won the best health economics paper award: "because prices exceed marginal cost, insurers have powerful incentives to engage in marketing activities to attract new clients. Indeed, the competition for new clients
-
Could someone explaint to me why the majority of economist brain seems to lock up when the words health care and information asymmetry are mentioned. Just that alone is supposed to prove no market could every exist in health care. I mean how do you even prove that? It seems to be so irresponsible that based on a theorethical idea of information asymmetry
-
"Scarcity, Marxism and Gosplan," Oxford Economic Papers, October 1953 "Thus in the Soviet economy there are, as it were, always too few hairbrushes and too many nailbrushes in view of the resources available, while in a 'capitalist' economy this proportion is always more nearly right. But the production of both these articles
-
Any ideas. I find it such a broad interprtation of externalities.
-
Attached is text from a book on quality of life. May be used to test your abillity to deal with externality/market failure argument, or for a good laugh.
-
Can't understand why you would do that but anyway. Force him to be concrete, he can argue b.s. because he has not made one concrete point. Only general b.s. For example ask him how he "emperically" test the relation between unemployment and minimum wage. Then tear apart anything he says. Show him that it is much much much worse than a
-
Sorry was in a rush. But the question I have is this: Does the distortian in the capital structure actually mean there must be an area with high demand for labour?