tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post5162634868549136720..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: No Nobel for Art Laffer, EverEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-29133015765740515092010-10-15T08:45:08.623-05:002010-10-15T08:45:08.623-05:00By the way: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/pr...By the way: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science/8269 I am sure you'll like that article.zbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04636763782334128869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-24226008645951559372010-10-13T23:38:17.227-05:002010-10-13T23:38:17.227-05:00I'd like to mention that last year Oliver Will...I'd like to mention that last year Oliver Williamson won the Nobel and I can't find a single equation written by him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-44471335064416367432010-10-13T13:50:51.522-05:002010-10-13T13:50:51.522-05:00Speaking of the Laffer curve, there was Mankiw'...Speaking of the Laffer curve, there was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/business/economy/10view.html?_r=1" rel="nofollow">Mankiw's article in the NYT</a> about working less if taxed more. Of course, in a progressive tax system, taxes act as a deterrent to extra work for high-earners and make the same opportunities more attractive to people with lower marginal rates (<a href="http://blog.morallybankrupt.org/2010/10/shut-up-nyt-mankiw-will-work-less-if.html" rel="nofollow">see post</a>). Not to mention that when there's hightened unemployment, it ends up redistributing work from those with high marginal rates, to those with low rates. If marginal rates are a good proxy for income, then it all also becomes a good way to redistribute work to those that need it.<br /><br />Too bad it won't win a prize, it's probably one of the most interesting and useful things I ever encountered as an econ undergrad.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12854212312458729028noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-81508360185043071602010-10-13T12:55:33.645-05:002010-10-13T12:55:33.645-05:00Yes, job search is an extension of stigler, just a...Yes, job search is an extension of stigler, just as Laffer borrowed from someone, and Markowitz from Shakespeare (and the Bible) but the same could be said for every idea (Newton's "I stand on the shoulders of giants"). <br /><br />It remains a formalization of a straightforward intuition--like most good ideas (with hindsight)-- and there is no greater consensus, or precision on issues is labor economics or macroeconmics because of it. A good idea, but I think no better than the Laffer curve.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-34320332689326631822010-10-13T12:32:15.333-05:002010-10-13T12:32:15.333-05:00I hope you know more about finance than you do abo...I hope you know more about finance than you do about the work of Diamond-Mortensen-Pissarides. Their prize was not for job search. That was Stigler in the early 1960's. <br /><br />They won the prize for integrating job creation, job destruction, quits, vacancies, job search into a consistent model. Workers look for jobs and firms look for workers, and how this matching process is affected by shocks to the economy. It was a great breakthrough, and a well-deserved prize.<br /><br />Laffer was not the first to note that a tax rate of 100% and one of 0% produce identical revenue. He just formalized it in a picture.Barry W. Ickeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02752613826710235482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-79032996457991165622010-10-13T09:10:43.791-05:002010-10-13T09:10:43.791-05:00my point was not where we are on the Laffer curve,...my point was not where we are on the Laffer curve, merely it exists, and implies raising tax rates does not necessarily increase tax revenues. The same kind of ambiguous implication resides in the work of Krugman and Stiglitz.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-29446755966293901682010-10-13T08:54:37.186-05:002010-10-13T08:54:37.186-05:00And speaking of practical value, there's virtu...And speaking of practical value, there's virtually no evidence that the federal government can increase its revenues by reducing the federal tax rate... and yet Laffer's cocktail napkin is embraced by politicians who are interested in neither maximizing government revenues nor increasing taxes. Fascinating.<br /><br />In a world where the government confiscated 100% of the wealth of its citizens, Laffer's brilliant observation would indeed be of the utmost importance. I guess that world is conservative fantasyland.Anyonymous #5noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-9948732559001940432010-10-13T08:43:39.420-05:002010-10-13T08:43:39.420-05:00On a related note, see Seth Robert's blog post...On a related note, see Seth Robert's blog post <a href="http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2010/09/28/the-nobel-prize-not-helping/" rel="nofollow">The Nobel Prize: Not Helping</a>. He argues that the Nobel prizes are awarded for high prestige work, and prestige is inversely related to practical value.Johnhttp://www.johndcook.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-86336355218537028692010-10-13T08:43:22.528-05:002010-10-13T08:43:22.528-05:00Speaking of pretentious uncertainty, is there any ...Speaking of pretentious uncertainty, is there any reason to believe that the Laffer curve has derivative zero at exactly one point?Anyonymous #5noreply@blogger.com