HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Outgrowing Libertarianism...
Date: 9 Sep 92 00:34:27 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <1992Sep8.183941.19971@newsgate.sps.mot.com> titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas) writes:
>In article <53064@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>|> Hate to break this to you, but most people do not volunteer to be
>|> discriminated against any more than they volunteer to be victims of
>|> fraud. 
>
>Victor seems to have a real problem comprehending English.  Perhaps it's not his
>native tongue.
>
> Translation: libertarians believe that market transactions should be
> mutually voluntary.  Negate this situation.  A transaction doesn't occur.
> One of the parties could have wanted it to occur.

If my company puts in a bid to supply widgets to Mega X corporation, and
Mega X corporation replies that it will not accept bids from firms that
employ honkies, then I've just engaged in an economic transaction which
is manifestly not agreeable to me. If you get the bid, because Mega X
likes your ethnic background, then you and Mega X have together acted to
deprive me of my right to enter the marketplace as an equal participant.
More to the point, if there is a widespread prejudice against people
of my ethnic background, and this acts to prevent my company from doing
business at all or to keep my company in a marginal position then
every economic transaction open to me is tainted by the effects of this
discrimination.

>|> Again, if A calls the cops to enforce his prejudices by violently
>|> ejecting B from his property, this will likely not be agreeable to B.
>|> To insist on viewing police enforced denial of serice on racialgrounds
>|> as "mutually agreeable" is nutty.
>
>No one claimed the denial of service was mutually agreeable.

You claim instead that denial of service is not an economic transaction.
This I dispute.

>
>If a = b & c then ^a = ^(b & c) = ^b || ^c
>
>Maybe when Victor is able to understand this basic logic he'll be worth paying attention
>to.

One can only do ones best.


>It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell

So you like science fiction.



-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu

Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: jmo@courant.princeton.edu (Mike Orszag)
Subject: Re: RBCs again
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 02:53:16 GMT

Robert Vinneau writes:

>> (I leave to one side the question of how anybody that knows anything
>> can place any credence in a theory that relies on an aggregate
>> Cobb-Douglas production function. It was demonstrated long ago that
>> C-D functions can fit data that has nothing to do with the mechanisms
>> assumed by C-D functions. Did the battle between the Cambridges >> really have this little effect?)

The issue is that the main justification for using Cobb-Douglas
production is not its simplicity (as for instance linear quadratic
production functions are much simpler in that a wider range of
models can be solved and the decision rules do not change when
additive noise is introduced) but that their use is ultimately
justified by macroeconomic observables. There is nothing wrong with an
aggregative theory based on a Cobb-Douglas production function
except when it is called a theory based on "microeconomic
foundations". Microeconomics necessarily contains more information
than macroeconomics so that there are naturally a wide range of
microeconomic structures consistent with aggregate Cobb-Douglas
behavior.

-- MIKE ORSZAG
From: davidm@consilium.com (David S. Masterson)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Property rights...`
Date: 14 Sep 92 20:11:49 GMT
	<BuKFtv.HI4@quake.sylmar.ca.us>
Organization: Consilium Inc., Mountain View, California
In-reply-to: brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us's message of 14 Sep 92 11:27:25 GMT
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.13  [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]

>>>>> On 14 Sep 92 11:27:25 GMT, brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder)
>>>>> said:

> In article <DAVIDM.92Sep13135705@consilium.com> davidm@consilium.com (David
> S. Masterson) writes:

>>Can we agree that the rights of the "individual" are those rights that the
>>"majority" has chosen to allow?  The "majority" giveth and the "majority" can
>>taketh away...

> Absolutely not!!  People have rights because of their nature as rational
> beings, and they have those rights whether or not the king, fuhrer,
> preident, or majority choose to recognize them or not.

Maybe you're right -- I should have said:

The rights an "individual" may exercise are those rights that the "majority"
has chosen to allow.  If the majority chooses to take away an individual's
right to (say) live, there isn't much the individual can say about it.
Likewise, if the majority has chosen to recognize the rights of the
individual, then the individual has been given some form of leverage to
maintain his individual integrity against the majority.

The point is, "rights" mean nothing by themselves -- they have to be
sanctioned by the "majority" in order to have any power.
--
====================================================================
David Masterson					Consilium, Inc.
(415) 691-6311					640 Clyde Ct.
davidm@consilium.com				Mtn. View, CA  94043
====================================================================
Now I lay me down to sleep;
Leave a message at the beep.
If I die before I wake,
Remember to erase the tape.
Organization: Masters student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Date: Tue,  8 Sep 1992 12:34:08 -0400 
From: Stephen Sorensen <ss9o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: The Deficit as a Retrospective Tax

Excerpts from netnews.sci.econ: 7-Sep-92 Re: The Deficit as a Retros..
by Dave Polewka@cleveland.F 
> .....who then take that money and invest it in the economy,
> creating more jobs!!  Jesus Christ, how many times do you
> have to be told before it gets through your thick skull!?!?!
>  

Given the international hyper-mobility of capital and the
decentralization of labor, it is far from certain that those dollars
create jobs in the US.
From: Bruce.Scott@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bruce Scott)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Free movement of labour/labor
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:38:17 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service

It may be interesting from an economic standpoint to consider the
effects of free movement of laborers, but I cannot fail to notice the
long-term disaster this would represent for a populationally stable,
economically strong country immersed in a world with an out of control
population growth rate.

Gruss,
Dr Bruce Scott                             The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik       odorless and transparent
bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de                 -- W Gibson

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: sci.econ,rec.travel,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.albania
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Milton Friedman...
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:52:58 EST
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <52935@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
> In article <1992Sep3.122917.3892@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>>In article <1161@kps.UUCP>, ded@kps.UUCP (David Edwards /DP) writes:
>>> In article <1992Aug31.142622.3826@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
>>>>
>>>>	Cuba lived off of the xUSSR for it's entire existence.  Now that that
>>>>particular sugar daddy is gone, you see the real Cuba.  No food.  No fuel.  A
>>>>mimicing of the Khmer Rouge exodus from the cities in order to force more
>>>>people to grow food.
>>>>
>>>>	It's quite sad.
>>> 
>>> Where should they get their fuel from under the current blockade? Why
>>
>>	It's an embargo.
>>
>>	They could always improve their human rights record, then trade with
>>the countries that respond to that kind of thing :).
> 
> Such as China?

	China responds to human rights improvements?  And here I thought it was
self-interest that guided them!

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: sci.econ,sci.physics.fusion,sci.philosophy.tech
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Sweden holds the line
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:53:56 GMT
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.


	It's nice to see Sweden man the barricades against currency
devaluation.  Raising the main lending rate to 75% preserved the krona against
the wave of Euro devaluations.

	It seems that at least one European country has learned the same lesson
that Mexico has.  Devaluating your currency provides a short term, and
illusionary, respite but prolongs the actual fiscal problems.

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
From: baindur@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Satyen Baindur)
Subject: Re: The Deficit as a Retrospective Tax
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:28:22 GMT

al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka) writes:


>In a previous article, baindur@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Satyen Baindur) says:


>>......... Paying down the debt, under the present tax structure, 
>>simply means sending more and more money earned by working people 
>>to the rich people !

>.....who then take that money and invest it in the economy,
>creating more jobs!!  Jesus Christ, how many times do you
>have to be told before it gets through your thick skull!?!?!

And I thought this was a relatively civilized newsgroup ! 
Oh well, now I know better. My thick skull indeed.
>-- 
>=======================
>"Endeavor to persevere"
>=======================
-- 

Graduate School ! It's not just a job, it's an indenture !!
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: cs6@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Eric Sit 3611)
Subject: Re: need details on devaluating U.S. currency
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:40:20 GMT

In article <2311@gandalf.intel.com> chedley@carthago.intel.com (CHEDLEY_AOURIRI) writes:
>In article <5esJ03Tu76p100@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, fierro@uts.amdahl.com (Doug Fierro) writes:
>...

>|> I can see that devaluating one's currency makes their products more attractive
>|> to purchase by foreigners, but the trade-off is foreigners will not want
>|> to invest much in that country, and I don't believe the U.S. can afford to
>|> start discouraging foreigners from buying our debt in our current situation.
>
>Well, low interest rates discourage investors from buying US debt. Which may
>be good for the US, as it will encourage the govt to balance its budget...
>
>|> But then again, if the U.S. can cut it's debt enough by devaluating the
>|> dollar, it might be an acceptable trade-off.  If this is not entirely correct
>|> let me know- details of course where I went wrong :-)
>|> 
>That is correct. 
>But it has some long term implications that may not be very pleasant.
>If the US tries to cut down its debt load by devaluating its currency (basically
>by printing more dollars), it will:
>
>1- Scare off investors and govt bond holders, who will decide not to buy any
>   more US govt bonds. The US treasury cannot afford that, given the huge
>   amount of deficits the govt is running which necessitate loads of money
>   to borrow.

I think a weak US currency would result in higher long-term interest rate. 
Foreign investor would not be as interested in US bonds until the interest 
rate rises to compensate for the currency risk.  Once this happens, foreign i
investors would come back for the US bonds.

>
>2- Reignite inflation, with all its negative consequences on the economy
>   in this country and all over the world.
>   This is probably a political argument, as politicians may opt for this
>   "solution" as the easy way out of the deficit problem.

According to the Economist, only 8.5% of the US's GDP is on imports.  So,
a 10-20% devaluation of the US dollar has little effect on inflation.  This
makes the latest round of dollar devaluation seem like a good way to reduce 
the debt owed to foreign investors without the danger of much higher inflation.


Eric
Newsgroups: sci.econ,va.general,alt.activism
From: Nigel.Allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Attorney General Terry Outlines Development Strategy for Virginia
Organization: NDA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:04:35 GMT

Here is a press release from the Attorney General of Virginia.
 
 Attorney General Terry Outlines Development Strategy for Virginia
 To: State and Business desks
 Contact: David A. Parsons of the Office of the Attorney General
          of Virginia, 804-786-2435

   WINTERGREEN, Va., Sept. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Attorney General
Mary Sue Terry today outlined five points that should be addressed
if Virginia is to forge an effective long-term economic development
strategy.
   Addressing members of the Virginia Economic Development
Association meeting here, Terry emphasized the need to develop
a balanced blueprint for devising future economic development
principles.
   Terry said:
   "First, we must recognize that a strong economic development
policy is the best social policy.
   "It is fundamental that an expanding economy creates jobs and
provides a broader tax base that allows government to provide
better services without increasing the tax burden.
   "Second, we must maintain and develop our economic base.
   "Industrial and tax policies must remain favorable to business
growth.  We must maintain our right-to-work law.  And, yes, we must
provide and invest adequate resources for state-level advertising
and marketing efforts that yielded such high dividends throughout
the 1980s.
   "Third, we must be prepared to address new and emerging
contemporary issues such as defense conversion strategies.
   "Fourth, the economic development process in Virginia should be
depoliticized.  Virginia should have a long-term strategic
development plan -- one that does not change every four years.
   "Fifth, Virginia must continue to establish itself as a leading
location for international inward investment. The emerging global
economy will require Virginia to compete not only with other states
in the U.S. for business investment, but other nations."
   In closing, Terry said:
   "I know a lot has been said about Virginia at this conference as
it relates to other states -- how Virginia stacks up against North
Carolina, Tennessee, Maryland.
   "But let me suggest, Virginia does best when it's not running
with the pack.  Let's face it.  There's no point in playing Triple A
ball when you know you can compete in the majors.
   "We must never lose sight of how attractive a business location
we are."
 -30-

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: mikeg@athena.mit.edu (Jughead)
Subject: Economics publications
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 02:20:59 GMT


I'm looking for publications that discuss in some detail current economic 
research and topics, something above the level that US News and World Report and
The Economist get into.  I know there are jillions of journals and papers out
there, but I'm looking for a good starting point for my independent research
without going into our library and picking something by random. 

Any help is greatly appreciated.


Mike Genrich
mikeg@athena.mit.edu
From: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Libertarians & Inheritance
Keywords: Do Libertarians endorse a level playing field
Date: 15 Sep 92 18:03:12 GMT
Reply-To: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pyramid Technologies, Mt. View, California.


What do libertarians think about inheritance laws?  Does libertarianism
endorse a "level playing field."  Is the "arbitrary" transfer of 
wealth from one (dead) person to others protected under property 
rights.  Is it consistent with efficient market theory, or might it
promote inefficiencies?

Please post in talk.politics.theory or directly to me.  Thanks.

Paul Collacchi
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Eric Titmas)
Subject: Re: Outgrowing Libertarianism...
Organization: SPS
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:27:36 GMT

In article <53115@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:

|> You claim instead that denial of service is not an economic transaction.
|> This I dispute.

Here we see a classic example of intellectual dishonesty.  Victor has just
admitted that he is not using the same English language everyone else is using.

My question yesterday is answered.  Victor is not worth reading - he goes into the kill
file.

-- 
Eric Titmas      Motorola ASIC       titmas@chdasic.sps.mot.com               

It is impossible to take in more money than Congress can spend.  - Thomas Sowell
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: The Deficit as a Retrospective Tax
Date: 7 Sep 1992 19:58:56 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, baindur@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Satyen Baindur) says:


>......... Paying down the debt, under the present tax structure, 
>simply means sending more and more money earned by working people 
>to the rich people !

.....who then take that money and invest it in the economy,
creating more jobs!!  Jesus Christ, how many times do you
have to be told before it gets through your thick skull!?!?!


-- 
=======================
"Endeavor to persevere"
=======================
Xref: sparky sci.econ:7424 talk.politics.misc:44442
From: Bruce.Scott@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bruce Scott)
Subject: Re: Free movement of labour/labor
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:04:04 GMT

In article <JACKSON.92Sep14154358@kaos.stsci.edu> jackson@kaos.stsci.edu (Bob Jackson) writes:
>w.r.t.
>	"out of control population growth rate"
>
>Control by whom?
>
   Themselves, of course. As others have said, we do the oppressing all
by ourselves, sometimes by making babies we have not the means to
support. (The idea, of course, is to control ourselves *before* it
becomes a crisis.)

Gruss,
Dr Bruce Scott                             The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik       odorless and transparent
bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de                 -- W Gibson

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Economic motivations...
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:14:51 GMT
Reply-To: pcollac@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Paul Collacchi)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pyramid Technologies, Mt. View, California.

In article <1992Sep4.144834.3921@desire.wright.edu>,
demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
|> In article <52933@dime.cs.umass.edu>, yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
(victor yodaiken) writes:
|> ...
|> > Honesty and clarity. Economics is deeply connected to morality, and it
|> 
|> 	No, it is not.
|> 
|> 	Economic justifications, however, frequently are.

Economics, is the science of measured aggregate and individual valuing
behaviors made by humans.  Valuing is an essential human expression.  Each
person has a private value system or morality.  Watching money, we can
essentially create a real valued function which allows us to measure one
aspect of human behavior -- valuing or morality.  In this sense, economics
is the science of human morality.

Self-described "value-free" scientists have a tendency to forget that human
behavior is the underlying driving force in all economic expression, micro or
macro. 

|> 
|> > is either disingenuous of simply mistaken to claim that one's economic
|> > program is based on scientific principles alone. Even if economics were
|> 
|> 	Not if your program is merely to make the economy grow, and not to
|> reward a certain sector.
|>
 
Growth economics -- i.e. making the economy grow -- IS a morality.

Its practice in this country elevates it to being a full blown ideology, if
not a world-view or religion.  A neutral person wouldn't give a shit what
the economy did.  Someone who is emotionally and intellectually attached to
a particular economic outcome --e.g. growth -- is obviously not (morally)
neutral.

At its worst, "economics" is belief-based politics, religious secularism 
disguised as science. Practitioners get stuck on trying to dick-around
with the system to get it to be the way they want it.  This is always
done using
some resort to mass goodness, and always results from the same base energies
that motivate all human behavior -- they want it that way.  It may be
a few or many somebodies.  It may even be a good system.  But it is always the
expression of human desire.

The point is this:  if you live your life unselfconsciously, then the total
economy is the sincere expression of lives.  If you try to alter the
rules, then
our lives become constrained by economic policymaking.  The rules determine the
game.    This is the basis of power politics as its been practice for about the
last twenty milennia.

Paul Collacchi
From: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Outgrowing Libertarianism...
Date: 6 Sep 1992 04:14:56 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: oogoody.corp.sun.com