Assorted on India
14 years ago
Economics, global development,current affairs, globalization, culture and more rants on the dismal science, and the society. "As usual, it's like being a kid in a candy store. I'm awed by the volume of high-quality daily links in general. Thanks!" - Chris Blattman
Deterrence. Fashionable at the moment for people to think the Israelis will take out the Iranians or that the Iranians are crazy and will attack Israel if they have a chance. Look at world history: very, very large number of international disputes since the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, many of which rose to the level of wars. Divide world into subgroups depending on possession of nuclear weapons or access to them via allies, etc. and plot probability of their becoming violent, see virtually nothing at the nuclear level; you only get war when there is no nuclear deterrence. Unlikely Iran would be different. Iranian leadership has been in power almost 30 years; little evidence of their irrationality. Shah. Muammar Gaddafi, depicted as irrational, rolled tanks to the border of Libya but didn't go over. Know how to stay in power but don't take undue risks. Much of U.S. foreign policy has been focused on making sure that no one else gets a nuclear weapon that doesn't already have one. Should we be so vigilant? 1982, article joint with William Riker, "Assessing the Merits of Selective Nuclear Proliferation", took positive rather than normative position--how does the world work as opposed to how should it work--to explain mutual deterrence. Why is the U.S. opposed to nuclear proliferation? Answer was that either you believe in deterrence or you believe you are willing to sacrifice deterrence to have the U.S. be in a dominant political position. If we have the bomb and they do not, that's an advantage. Usual argument to oppose it is window dressing.




10. Fiscal policy focused on medium-term sustainability has delivered a sequence of surpluses that has eliminated commonwealth net debt. This leaves Australia with a strong fiscal position, an enviable situation by international standards. We support the strategy in the latest budget to save the revenue windfall from the commodity driven boom and thereby allow automatic stabilizers to support monetary policy. Saving some of the revenue from the commodity price boom in three new funds will take pressure off monetary policy in the near term and enable increased infrastructure investment over the medium term.
11. The reduction in public spending growth in the latest budget illustrates the government's commitment to help reduce inflation. With the upside risks to the outlook for inflation, more public spending restraint could be required and we encourage the authorities to identify areas where additional spending cuts could be implemented. In addition, positive revenue surprises should be saved to assist monetary policy until it is clear that inflation will decline. Given the uncertainty about how much of the increase in commodity prices will be permanent, saving the additional revenue in the near-term may avoid sharp changes in taxes and spending in the future.
12. The states have increased capital spending and their budget balance has shifted to a small deficit in aggregate, thereby adding stimulus to the economy. This highlights the importance of maintaining restraint at the commonwealth level.
13. To the extent that the improvement in the budget balance is structural, associated with permanently higher commodity prices, this should provide scope to reduce taxes or increase spending over the medium term. The governments' intention to achieve a positive balance over the medium term should increase public net worth, further strengthening the fiscal position. Our analysis suggests that a combination of lower labor and capital income taxes, along with increased public investment, will generate the largest economic gains. The gains from other options such as lower consumption taxes or higher public consumption are not as large. Despite the expected structural improvement in the medium term, significant long-term fiscal challenges remain, particularly in the area of healthcare spending, and early adjustments will be key to preserving fiscal sustainability.
Q: Economists love to analyze markets for goods that are illegal (e.g., drugs, prostitution, etc.). One study showed that the own-price elasticity of the demand for powder cocaine (in absolute value) is 1.2, while the comparable elasticity for marijuana is 0.6. You have probably observed that the federal and state governments punish cocaine suppliers and dealers more severely than they punish marijuana dealers. Give TWO possible (if unlikely) explanations that relate back to demand analysis for this difference in policy.