The Fora: A Higher Education Community

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 03:25:29 PM

Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 08, 2024, 03:07:04 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 02:26:13 PM

Quote from: spork on October 08, 2024, 01:37:22 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 07, 2024, 10:39:04 PM

Quotesheesh, dismalist, some of us dont want to just give up and work all day every day with just a few specific types of ppl

I don't see a connection to anything anyone has said on this thread. One admits, hires, promotes those people who should be admitted, hired, or promoted.  People differ, and different decisions will be made. Charlie Darwin will do the rest.

QuoteBut I think its safe to say we all agree there are far too many economists ;)

Of course there are! Which ones are superfluous?
 

Robert Rubin, though I suppose he's not really an economist because his Harvard B.A. is in economics while his graduate degree is from Harvard Law School, which means he's even worse.

Robert Rubin? That's defining deviancy down!

I'd go back in time and redirect?get rid of?do something nefarious to?  Laffer.

Strangely, Laffer had a valid point: Suppose the tax rate is zero per cent. Tax revenue will be zero. Suppose the tax rate is 100%. Tax revenue will be zero, for no one will work! Maximum tax revenue will be achieved somewhere between the two extremes. So far, so good.

The difficulty lies in determining which side of the Laffer Curve one is on. I have no doubt that Sweden in the late 1970's was on the wrong [right hand]side of the Laffer Curve, so a cut in tax rates will raise tax revenue. Neither did the Swedes doubt that. They fixed it. I have no doubt that the US today is on the correct [left hand] side of the Laffer Curve, though pre-1986 there is some evidence that really high earners were on the wrong side.

The other point to make about Laffer's thought is that it was only one of two economic ideas first written [published?] on a dinner tablecloth [the other being a tariff cutting formula everybody agreed to (well, sort of) in the early 1990's].

Anyway, Rubin and Laffer are in their '80s.

Get rid of Arthur Laffer? No, we kill hypotheses, not people.

Not sure if Laffer's work has ever been proven in the real world.

The primary factor in the effect of taxes is compliance. Greece, for example, has a pretty low compliance rate across the board.

The US is actually doing okay. Billionaires don't use (legal) tax loopholes because they can't "afford" their taxes, it's because they can.

Quote from: pgher on October 08, 2024, 03:30:59 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 11:11:33 AMGluts and shortages are self-correcting. In the first case wages fall, causing entry to fall; in the second they rise, causing entry to rise. Nothing to see here.

The problem is the lag. High schoolers today want to study AI. By the time they get a degree, will the market be so hot for whatever skills they have? I doubt it. Consider fields where you need a PhD/JD/MD/etc., and the lag is even more of a killer. Plus there is a severe lack of good information. Do those same high schoolers really know the wages in all of the fields that they might have the skills to enter? I doubt it.

But neither you nor I nor the Bureau of Labor Statistics know any more than they do about future wages.

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 11:11:33 AMGluts and shortages are self-correcting. In the first case wages fall, causing entry to fall; in the second they rise, causing entry to rise. Nothing to see here.

The problem is the lag. High schoolers today want to study AI. By the time they get a degree, will the market be so hot for whatever skills they have? I doubt it. Consider fields where you need a PhD/JD/MD/etc., and the lag is even more of a killer. Plus there is a severe lack of good information. Do those same high schoolers really know the wages in all of the fields that they might have the skills to enter? I doubt it.

Quote from: jimbogumbo on October 08, 2024, 03:07:04 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 02:26:13 PM

Quote from: spork on October 08, 2024, 01:37:22 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 07, 2024, 10:39:04 PM

Quotesheesh, dismalist, some of us dont want to just give up and work all day every day with just a few specific types of ppl

I don't see a connection to anything anyone has said on this thread. One admits, hires, promotes those people who should be admitted, hired, or promoted.  People differ, and different decisions will be made. Charlie Darwin will do the rest.

QuoteBut I think its safe to say we all agree there are far too many economists ;)

Of course there are! Which ones are superfluous?
   

Robert Rubin, though I suppose he's not really an economist because his Harvard B.A. is in economics while his graduate degree is from Harvard Law School, which means he's even worse.

Robert Rubin? That's defining deviancy down!

I'd go back in time and redirect?get rid of?do something nefarious to?  Laffer.

Strangely, Laffer had a valid point: Suppose the tax rate is zero per cent. Tax revenue will be zero. Suppose the tax rate is 100%. Tax revenue will be zero, for no one will work! Maximum tax revenue will be achieved somewhere between the two extremes. So far, so good.

The difficulty lies in determining which side of the Laffer Curve one is on. I have no doubt that Sweden in the late 1970's was on the wrong [right hand]side of the Laffer Curve, so a cut in tax rates will raise tax revenue. Neither did the Swedes doubt that. They fixed it. I have no doubt that the US today is on the correct [left hand] side of the Laffer Curve, though pre-1986 there is some evidence that really high earners were on the wrong side.

The other point to make about Laffer's thought is that it was only one of two economic ideas first written [published?] on a dinner tablecloth [the other being a tariff cutting formula everybody agreed to (well, sort of) in the early 1990's].

Anyway, Rubin and Laffer are in their '80s.

Get rid of Arthur Laffer? No, we kill hypotheses, not people.

Quote from: dismalist on October 08, 2024, 02:26:13 PM

Quote from: spork on October 08, 2024, 01:37:22 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 07, 2024, 10:39:04 PM

Quotesheesh, dismalist, some of us dont want to just give up and work all day every day with just a few specific types of ppl

I don't see a connection to anything anyone has said on this thread. One admits, hires, promotes those people who should be admitted, hired, or promoted.  People differ, and different decisions will be made. Charlie Darwin will do the rest.

QuoteBut I think its safe to say we all agree there are far too many economists ;)

Of course there are! Which ones are superfluous?
   

Robert Rubin, though I suppose he's not really an economist because his Harvard B.A. is in economics while his graduate degree is from Harvard Law School, which means he's even worse.

Robert Rubin? That's defining deviancy down!

I'd go back in time and redirect?get rid of?do something nefarious to?  Laffer.

Quote from: spork on October 08, 2024, 01:37:22 PM

Quote from: dismalist on October 07, 2024, 10:39:04 PM

Quotesheesh, dismalist, some of us dont want to just give up and work all day every day with just a few specific types of ppl

I don't see a connection to anything anyone has said on this thread. One admits, hires, promotes those people who should be admitted, hired, or promoted.  People differ, and different decisions will be made. Charlie Darwin will do the rest.

QuoteBut I think its safe to say we all agree there are far too many economists ;)

Of course there are! Which ones are superfluous?
   

Robert Rubin, though I suppose he's not really an economist because his Harvard B.A. is in economics while his graduate degree is from Harvard Law School, which means he's even worse.

Robert Rubin? That's defining deviancy down!

On the syllabus, on the course page, and in person in class I warn students not to book winter break travel until after the final exam schedule is released by the registrar's office. I tell them that it is against university policy to give a final exam other than in its scheduled block, and I can't and won't make exceptions. They also get emails about this from the registrar's office.

The final exam schedule is now out, and I got the first, but I'm sure not the last, student with a sad story that their family booked their tickets already and they want to take it early. BANG, BANG, BANG.

I told her she could talk to her academic services advisor but they would almost certainly say no too. 

Quote from: dismalist on October 07, 2024, 10:39:04 PM

Quotesheesh, dismalist, some of us dont want to just give up and work all day every day with just a few specific types of ppl

I don't see a connection to anything anyone has said on this thread. One admits, hires, promotes those people who should be admitted, hired, or promoted.  People differ, and different decisions will be made. Charlie Darwin will do the rest.

QuoteBut I think its safe to say we all agree there are far too many economists ;)

Of course there are! Which ones are superfluous?
   

Robert Rubin, though I suppose he's not really an economist because his Harvard B.A. is in economics while his graduate degree is from Harvard Law School, which means he's even worse.

The "it's so much cheaper" was the actual reason here too!
This is the third LMS in the last 10 years for this campus.

Must be time for me to send out my quarterly "I need to know who you are so I can help you + there are 700 of you and just 1 of me" emails.