August 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Blog powered by Typepad

« Worldly Philosopher: The Odyssey of Albert O. Hirschmann (forthcoming 2013) | Main | George Stigler on Carl Menger »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

"In the play between preferences and situations, Gill is able to provide an explanation of intimate relationship between religious and overall liberty."

"Buchanan then concluded that the virtue of federalism was to allow an efficient allocation of resources, even when there are externalities, because it allows individuals to "trade" public goods as if they were private goods by moving move from one community to the other." - Alain Maricano,

I am really loving that paper! The exchange between Buchanan and Samuelson is so good. It's all about preferences...and many good arguments in favor of our preferences have been offered...but half of our nation's revenue is spent without regard to our preferences. Therefore, clearly, we still need better arguments in favor of our preferences.

How can we help the public understand that their preferences are important?

Here's another "treasure" that I just found...

"As indicated by the emergence of the taxpayers' revolt and concerns for inflation, America is entering an era of economic conservatism. The citizentry is asserting that taxpayers must have a choice in the services provided, that these services should reflect their priorities, and that reasonable value is expected for tax dollars. For educators, these "new" values reflect a demand for taxpayer sovereignty, greater choice among educational programs, and more responsiveness on the part of educational systems." - Daniel J. Brown, The Case For Tax-Target Plans

How great is that? Yet...a google search for "The Case For Tax-Target Plans" only offers four results. Ughhh. I'll add it to the Wikipedia entry on tax choice once my block is over :D

"He reads skeptically claims of self-flattery and high motives, and instead traces back to rational self-interest but always understood within a specified context (read ecological rationality not constructivist rationality)."

This looks exactly like Elster's complaint: instead of reaching a conclusion based on the evidence, he is forcing the evidence to fit into the conclusion he came to it with.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Books