The “Treasury View”: An (un-)expected return?

Abstract

By examining the rhetorical use of an old piece of economic theory by some contemporary economists, this paper intends to report on “how today's economists conduct a public policy debate”. This paper is neither a scholarly history of the interwar debate nor a sophisticated critique of current economic policy. It is an attempt to link the policy and theoretical arguments of two similar debates separated by nearly 80 years. The second part of the paper demonstrates that the (un-)expected return of the Treasury View is a case study illustrating two very different modelling strategies.     

Economic Theory as a Guideline for Government Intervention and Control: Comment

This paper provides an institutionalist analysis of the impasse over labor issues that has stalled much needed reform of U.S. immigration policy. While it is unlikely that institutional economics can dislodge a century of conventional wisdom regarding the impact of immigrants on the labor market, a more modest goal is to refute the mainstream economic assertion that what the United States needs to do is to reduce the supply of immigrants, a conclusion that fuels the disgraceful "war on immigrants" that has long plagued reasonable debate over immigration policy.     

The Economics and Ethics of Minimum Wage Legislation

Recent empirical studies have led the economics profession to question the proposition that minimum wage legislation necessarily leads to greater unemployment. This paper extends the analysis of these studies by providing several theoretical reasons why these empirical results may reflect a larger truth. Moreover, it addresses a relatively neglected aspect of the minimum wage debate - its ethical dimensions. Specifically, do the elementary principles of economic justice mandate that employees who “play by the rules”, should earn a “living wage”? This paper argues that the minimum wage is a successful economic policy that is consistent with economic justice.     

Market failure vs. system failure as a rationale for economic policy? A critique from an evolutionary perspective

This paper reconsiders the explanation of economic policy from an evolutionary economics perspective. It contrasts the neoclassical equilibrium notions of market and government failure with the dominant evolutionary neo-Schumpeterian and Austrian-Hayekian perceptions. Based on this comparison, the paper criticizes the fact that neoclassical reasoning still prevails in non-equilibrium evolutionary economics when economic policy issues are examined. This is more than surprising, since proponents of evolutionary economics usually view their approach as incompatible with its neoclassical counterpart. In addition, it is shown that this “fallacy of failure thinking” even finds its continuation in the alternative concept of “system failure” with which some evolutionary economists try to explain and legitimate policy interventions in local, regional or national innovation systems. The paper argues that in order to prevent the otherwise fruitful and more realistic evolutionary approach from undermining its own criticism of neoclassical economics and to create a consistent as well as objective evolutionary policy framework, it is necessary to eliminate the equilibrium spirit. Finally, the paper delivers an alternative evolutionary explanation of economic policy which is able to overcome the theory-immanent contradiction of the hitherto evolutionary view on this subject.     

Consumption and Welfare: Two Views of Value Added

The standard view is that value is added to raw material by labor and capital. The question here discussed is whether or not raw material must contain value previously added by nature, or whether it can be simply inert indestructible building blocks. Can humanly added value substitute for value added by nature? If the answer were yes, it should be possible, since matter-energy is not destroyed in consumption, to substitute the waste flow of matter-energy for the flow of fresh natural resources (raw materials). But this would contradict the second law of thermodynamics. The quality of low entropy is what differentiates raw material from waste, and we know of no process whose net effect is to lower the entropy of the total system on which we depend. We must focus more on “that to which value is added,” and not just on value added. This is especially true as the former more and more replaces the latter as the limiting factor in production. Further consequences of the two different views about value added for theory and policy are discussed.     

From Judicial Sovereignty to Collective Democracy: The Development of J.R. Commons’ Perspective on Progressive Institutional Change

Abstract:

This article clarifies the significance of “collective democracy” in the works of John R. Commons by comparing it with “judicial sovereignty” in terms of its contribution to “progress.” We can thus answer two issues that Paul D. Bush does not clearly address: (i) what setup for policy formation contributes to progress and (ii) what is the role of economists within a collective democracy? Based on the comparison, the answer to the first question is collective democracy, and regarding the second question, the roles of economists as both economists and “institutional” economists are extrapolated.     

Do subsidies have positive impacts on R&D and innovation activities at the firm level?

In this paper we analyze whether and how “research” and “development” subsidies influence private R&D activity. Our empirical results show that “research” subsidies stimulate R&D spending within firms while “development” subsidies substitute such spending. At the theoretical level we find empirical support for the market failure argument that private R&D expenditure is best stimulated in areas where the gap between the social and the private rate of return to R&D is high. A policy implication is that technology programs should support research projects in the private sector in order to stimulate to more R&D.     

Toward Generalized Evolutionism: Beyond “Generalized Darwinism” and Its Critics

This article seeks to transcend the debate regarding “generalized Darwinism” or “universal Darwinism” for the social sciences. Highlighting recent discoveries in evolutionary biology, the article argues that it is no longer tenable to insist that (neo-)Darwinism is the only proper doctrine for understanding biological evolution. Moreover, social evolution is much more than purely (neo-)Darwinian or (neo-)Lamarckian. As such, the debate on whether we deploy only (neo-)Darwinism or (neo-)Lamarckism — generalized or not — to understand social evolution is a red herring. Instead, social scientists should embrace “generalized evolutionism,” a more accommodating and versatile doctrine that subsumes “(generalized) Darwinism” or “(generalized) Lamarckism.” Empirical inquiries that deploy “generalized evolutionism” have shed important new light on some critical puzzles in human society: from institutional change to the foundation of economic development before 1500 AD, through the coming of the industrial revolution, to the evolution of the international system. More empirical efforts along this line of theorizing are needed.     

The effects of immigration restriction laws on immigrant segregation in the early twentieth century U.S.

Several immigration restriction laws, passed in the background of anti-immigration populism in the early 1920s, put an end to the period of “open borders” in the U.S. In this paper, I use the linked county sample in the early twentieth century to examine how immigration restriction laws led to different trends in segregation across groups. Difference-in-difference estimations show that all immigrant groups followed similar trends in segregation before the passage of immigration laws; afterwards, segregation among immigrants from more restricted countries declined relative to segregation among immigrants from less restricted countries. I then construct linked census samples at the individual level, and study mechanisms behind de-segregation. I find two possible mechanisms: (a) limitations on new arrivals; (b) selection on return migration. Further analyses suggest that de-segregation might not benefit immigrants’ socioeconomic assimilation.     

Solving the Misesian migration conundrum

This paper reviews Ludwig Von Mises’ concerns surrounding unrestricted immigration and relates them to the current debate surrounding immigrants’ impact on destination countries’ institutions. It then outlines a policy of generally unrestricted immigration with selective restrictions that addresses Mises’ concerns and concerns about destination country institutions, while still achieving the majority of the economic gains that unrestricted immigration is forecast to achieve.

     

World energy outlook: An assessment of long-term energy developments and related policies

The purpose of this article is two-fold. It provides a framework for understanding what happened in the recently failed effort to reform the U.S. medical industry. The guiding theme is that politicians, the public at large and social scientists framed the discussion in largely ritualistic terms: “bureaucratic reformers” advocated a federally regulated national health system: “market reformers” advocated a free market health system. This framing of the debate doomed meaningful reform, whether or not the Clinton plan had passed. Second, with this discussion as backdrop, a closely related problem is examined:1 why most social scientists failed to introduce more thoughtful, critical discussion into public debate. This part of the discussion draws on, though is not limited to, the author's experience of more than a decade with issues of health planning and policy,2 in medical industry reform in Omaha and in Nebraska.     

Fiscal space on the eurozone periphery and the use of the (partially) balanced-budget multiplier: The case of Spain

This article adopts the “functional finance” approach to consider the utilization of expansive fiscal policies in the members of the European Monetary Union most affected by high unemployment. As they do not have their own monetary policy, fiscal deficits require the issuing of public debt without the support of the central bank. The authors consequently incorporate the notion of a (partially) balanced-budget expansion to achieve the desired stimulus in gross domestic product (GDP) with the least possible effect on public debt. Their proposal is only a sort of “imperfect” balanced-budget expansion: It is based on the idea that simultaneous increases in public revenue and expenditure can boost GDP, but without any pretension of keeping public deficit unchanged. Specifically, the authors use the case of Spain to show that a more expansive fiscal policy is desirable on economic grounds, and that only institutional constraints prevent it. They do it presenting two alternative scenarios for the coming years and analyzing their different impact on unemployment and fiscal sustainability. The first represents a firm commitment to budget consolidation, whereas the second is based on this “imperfect” application of the balanced budget multiplier. The main conclusion is that a more expansive fiscal policy is perfectly compatible with finance sustainability.     

Population and development: controversy and reconciliation

This paper evaluates the 2 most important antinatalist arguments the have dominated the population debate over the last 25 years, drawing heavily on 3 1984 studies -- land and resource scarcity and saving and investment. The extent to which these arguments have successfully included the indirect effects of population growth on an economy in order to determine the net impact of population is assessed an emerging revisionist interpretation of the role of population in development is discussed. It is believed that on scientific grounds, and focusing primarily on economic impact, neither the arguments nor the various models used to support the antinatalist position sufficiently support the strength of the general conclusion that population growth exerts a strong adverse impact on the economy. Population growth reveals sooner the symptoms of underlying problems, but many of the solutions are to be found in areas other than altering the rate of population growth. Population growth is viewed less as a cause of development problems and more as an agent that pushes more fundamental problems to the forefront. Empirical evidence concerning nonrenewable resource constraints is not sufficient to make any strong conclusion about the impact of rapid population growth. With regard to food, the problem is more one of unrealized potential for increasing agricultural output and of the distribution of income than of diminishing returns to land. The results of economic research have failed to provide substantial and convincing empirical evidence to support the strong antinatalist concern about the adverse effect rapid population growth has on savings and investment. Authors of recent literature reviews deemphasized this impact. A revisionist interpretation deemphasizes some of the traditional" hypothesized direct influence of population and assigns population the role of an accomplice in contrast to the leading role of villain in the development story. To this list is added the importance of the pace of population growth and the political response to it. 2 problems commonly attributed to population are noted to illustrate some of the relevant considerations: food imbalance and high unemployment rates. For many countries, a main cause of food shortage is government policy that penalizes agriculture through the imposition of taxes and subsidies that twist the terms of trade against farmers, thereby reducing incentives to produce and innovate. 1 impact of rapid population growth is to bring this problem to a head sooner. It also forces a more rapid response. The critical question is whether such "time pressure" is more or less likely to bring about changes that will address the causes of the problem or the manifestations of problems. For high rates of unemployment or underemployed labor in 3rd world cities, the question is whether the pressure of time results in a resolution of the fundamental causes or just a treatment of the symptoms.     

Urban Planning,Smart Growth,and Economic Calculation: An Austrian Critique and Extension

This paper takes a critical look at the Smart Growth movement and its reliance on traditional central planning to achieve its goals. Using statewide planning in Oregon, Florida, and Washington State as examples, the paper examines the planning focus of recent efforts to manage growth through land-use planning at the state level. It then applies the Austrian critique of economic planning to the contemporary Smart Growth movement in the United States as it is reflected in statewide planning laws. The calculation debate focused primarily on the technical question of whether bureaucratic planning could, in fact, achieve market outcomes. In the current debate over Smart Growth, planning combines political and bureaucratic decisionmaking. The political context in which planning decisions are made fundamentally alters the decision making process, shifting the emphasis to articulate knowledge as the foundation for policymaking. To be relevant in the current debate over planning, the calculation debate needs to be extended to include a political dimension to its critique of planning.     

Medical service reform: Rituals,hypothetical games and the social sciences

The purpose of this article is two-fold. It provides a framework for understanding what happened in the recently failed effort to reform the U.S. medical industry. The guiding theme is that politicians, the public at large and social scientists framed the discussion in largely ritualistic terms: “bureaucratic reformers” advocated a federally regulated national health system: “market reformers” advocated a free market health system. This framing of the debate doomed meaningful reform, whether or not the Clinton plan had passed. Second, with this discussion as backdrop, a closely related problem is examined:¹ why most social scientists failed to introduce more thoughtful, critical discussion into public debate. This part of the discussion draws on, though is not limited to, the author's experience of more than a decade with issues of health planning and policy,² in medical industry reform in Omaha and in Nebraska.     

The concept of “lawfulness” in economic matters. Reading Ibn Rushd (Averroes)

Abstract

In the Middle Ages the major concept through which economic matters are analysed and evaluated is the “lawful”, in Arabic jâ’iz, concept. It claims to establish whether a gain, a profit, a contract is lawful or not: that is the main question theologians examine when they are addressing the issue of appreciating any economic fact. In our study, we analyse the criteria of the “lawfulness” as found in the economic parts of Ibn Rushd's work entitled Bidâyat al-mujtahid wa nihâyat al-muqta?id (English translation: The Distinguished Jurist's Primer). Our thesis is inspired essentially by Raymond De Roover's studies on the economic thought in the Middle Ages. De Roover shows that the criteria for lawfulness are to be found in the nature of the contract between partners: a gain is lawful if the contract which generates it is lawful. Our study essentially consists in a text analysis.     

Moving markets? Government bond investors and microeconomic policy changes

Do sovereign bond markets react systematically to microeconomic policy reforms? Some observers suggest that investors are very attentive to supply‐side policies such as those related to labor markets, corporate taxation, and product standards. They argue that, along with macroeconomic outcomes and broad financial market conditions, such reforms affect sovereign bond premiums, for developed as well as emerging economies. In contrast, we predict few systematic effects of supply‐side policy reforms on sovereign bond market outcomes. Our theory draws on a standard three‐equation model of the economy, widely accepted among economic and finance professionals. That model makes few clear predictions regarding the anticipated effects of microeconomic policy changes; as a result, we expect that such reforms will not generate systematic market reactions. Our analyses, based on daily data from 37 countries from 2004 to 2012, indeed reveal little evidence of a systematic bond market reaction to the 47 most significant reforms to corporate taxation and labor market regulation. These results call into question the notion that “bond market vigilantes” play a central role in compelling governments to enact specific microeconomic policy changes.     

THE NON‐TRADED SECTOR,LOBBYING, AND THE CHOICE BETWEEN THE CUSTOMS UNION AND THE COMMON MARKET

This paper models immigration policy as the outcome of political competition between interest groups representing individuals employed in different sectors. In standard positive theory, restrictive immigration policy results from a low‐skilled median voter voting against predominantly low‐skilled immigration. In the present paper, in contrast, once trade policies are liberalized, restrictive immigration policy results from anti‐immigration lobbying by interest groups representing the non‐traded sectors. It is shown that this is in line with empirical regularities from recent episodes of restrictive immigration legislation in the European Union. It is further shown that if governments negotiate bilaterally over trade and migration policy regimes, the equilibrium regime depends (i) on the sequencing of the international negotiation process and (ii) on the set of available trade and migration policy regimes. In particular, the most comprehensive and most welfare‐beneficial type of liberalization may be rejected only because a less comprehensive type of liberalization is available.     

Scientific misconduct and research ethics in economics: an introduction

Abstract

Since the screening of Inside Job in movie theatres around the world in 2010, research integrity in economics has been questioned by scholars and public intellectuals. Prestigious economists and policy makers are accused of conflicts of interest while prominent economists are charged with plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Some of these economists replied to accusations about themselves while many others have preferred not to respond at all. These days, economists hear the following question more often than before: “what is wrong with economics?”