Assorted links

by on October 11, 2011 at 12:39 pm in Uncategorized | Permalink

1. Economic analysis of where the NBA stands.

2. How NYU lured Thomas Sargent, who by the way seems to like Borges, and Henderson on Sargent, and a rude guy in Italian.

3. Via Cafe Hayek, Henry Simons reviews Keynes.

4. Bernanke and Sims on the price of oil and recessions.

5. Complaints Choir of Tokyo, hat tip Yana.

6. Bruce Bartlett on 9-9-9.

Andy October 11, 2011 at 1:00 pm

@2: I am amazed that the article didn’t discuss the multimillion dollar apartment (in The Pierre iirc) that NYU lets Sargent and his wife use. The common understanding is that was a huge part in his recruitment.

anon October 11, 2011 at 1:15 pm


Loved the facemasks. And the accordion!
The world would be a much better place if more people played the accordion.

Thanks Yana.

anon October 11, 2011 at 1:16 pm

5. Complaints Choir of Tokyo, hat tip Yana.

Loved the facemasks. And the accordion!
The world would be a much better place if more people played the accordion.

Thanks Yana.

Jim October 11, 2011 at 1:19 pm

6: Wow, the New York Times is horrified that Cain wants lower taxes to spur economic growth.

Perhaps you could link to Rush Limbaugh’s opinion on Obama’s illegal immigration stance? That would be equally enlightening. Thanks.

msgkings October 11, 2011 at 3:28 pm

Apparently Cain wants to lower them only on the wealthy, and increase them dramatically on the poor. This is worthy of comment, from whatever source.

Dean October 11, 2011 at 4:36 pm

Are you aware at all of Bruce Bartlett’s political leanings?

Foghat October 11, 2011 at 5:25 pm

Via Wikipedia:
Bruce Bartlett (b. October 11, 1951, in Ann Arbor, Michigan) is an American historian who turned to writing about supply-side economics. He was a domestic policy adviser to President Ronald Reagan and was a Treasury official under President George H.W. Bush.
What kind of political climate do we live in, when someone who worked for two conservative Republican Presidents is cited as the liberal version of Rush Limbaugh?

Dan Weber October 11, 2011 at 5:33 pm

It’s possible his political alignment has changed in the past 20 years. It does happen.

Finch October 12, 2011 at 9:41 am

Not around here…

John Thacker October 11, 2011 at 8:08 pm

What kind of political climate do we live in, when someone who worked for two conservative Republican Presidents is cited as the liberal version of Rush Limbaugh?

A climate where that person, Bruce Bartlett, became consumed with hatred for Republicans to the point where he’ll contract his own opinion on policy to avoid agreeing with a Republican? I mean, this is the same guy that supposedly hated the bipartisan compromise that was Medicare Part D but then agreed with Frum that the Republicans should have done the same thing with PPACA as they did with Medicare Part D.

At least Frum is consistent about his Bushian policy views.

John Thacker October 11, 2011 at 8:27 pm

So the plan eliminates almost all deductions in exchange for lowering rates? It also institutes a VAT in exchange for lowering rates?

And so, Bartlett, in a complete reversal from his policy views, hates it because he now hates Republicans. I don’t think it has anything to do with policy, even. He’s simply become a hateful, close-minded individual obsessed with partisanship.

John Thacker October 11, 2011 at 8:32 pm

Personally, I don’t think that the math quite adds up in Cain’s plan.

But to see Bartlett attack the plan for switching to a territorial system for corporate income tax (like all other countries) and for eliminating deductions and adding a VAT in exchange for lowering rates is just sad.

jk October 12, 2011 at 10:12 am

The canned reply is, “any tax that is fair across the board “punishes” lower income people.”

Scott Sumner October 11, 2011 at 1:25 pm

Great review by Simons. Simons is basically saying that Keynes wrote an old Keynesian treatise, whereas the logic of his argument pointed in a new Keynesian direction—have the central bank target the price level. Fifty years later Woodford, et al, provided the appropriate Keynesian model.

joshua October 11, 2011 at 1:32 pm

5. “This means that the 47 percent of tax filers who now pay no federal income taxes will pay 9 percent on their total income”

Left thinks this is a bug, but it’s meant by Right as a feature.

The Anti-Gnostic October 12, 2011 at 12:04 pm

As it should be. The tax base in a democracy should be as broad as the voting franchise. If there’s a tax everybody should pay it.

Chris October 11, 2011 at 1:49 pm

1 is not analysis of any kind. Gut feeling speculation maybe but not analysis. The owners are absolutely prepared to kill the season and the players are idiots not to listen to the agents and decertify. The season is lost and getting a ruling on what a sports league can and can’t do under antitrust law outside the statutory labor exemption would be extremely interesting. The NBA is the only league this can happen in due to the small size and high median salary.

Davide October 11, 2011 at 3:09 pm

Not sure I understand why the Italian guy is rude… FWIW I’m a native Italian speaker and I read the article in the original Italian, so it might be something that’s lost in (the lack of) translation? He’s certainly colourful when he compares this Nobel to a cosmetic hymenoplasty, but I wouldn’t call him rude.

alberto bisin October 11, 2011 at 3:11 pm

Dear smooth highness,

Why rude? Why guy?


dan in euroland October 11, 2011 at 5:59 pm

How about an English translation?

Donald Pretari October 11, 2011 at 3:43 pm

It’s wonderful to see someone post Henry Simons, and this is one of his gems.

Michael G Heller October 11, 2011 at 3:48 pm

3 and 5 made my day. They are gems.

On Simons: Oh I miss the old days when you called a spade a spade with brute elegance.

On Sumner: I guess he must mean in praise of this Taylorish sentence, which Weber and Hayek and Mises would have endorsed…

“[Keynes] overlooks the need (clearly suggested by his own analysis) for the minimization of monetary uncertainties and the achievement of a monetary system based on definite and stable rules.

KenF October 11, 2011 at 4:18 pm

This Hungarian one is really well done:

Rob October 11, 2011 at 5:47 pm

The 9-9-9 plan may very well be a bad idea, but Bartlett’s analysis is weak: e.g. he says the deduction for goods but not labor from the corporation income tax would lead to corporations paying their employees in kind as a tax dodge, but he fails to consider the goods would be subject to a sales tax at the same 9% rate. He also says the deduction for dividends from the corporate tax would also create a tax dodge because companies could borrow to pay dividends, but he fails to acknowledge the dividends would also be taxable income at the same 9% rate.

Adolfo Laurenti October 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm

I agree that the translation may have played a trick, because Alberto Bisin’s post is not rude at all, but very congratulatory with Sargent, and the colorful remark is really aimed at disparaging Krugman.

TGGP October 13, 2011 at 12:23 am

Yeah, I was confused.

David R October 11, 2011 at 7:22 pm

Why would anyone take a tax plan from Herman Cain seriously? I mean why would anyone waste the time to do so?

John Thacker October 11, 2011 at 8:06 pm

Probably because he has a degree in mathematics from Morehouse, a Masters in Computer Science from Purdue, worked as a mathematician/ballistics analyst for the Navy, and served as Deputy Chairman and then Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City.

I mean, I realize that he’s only described as “that pizza guy,” but arguably he at least should be able to do math. Perhaps his math is bad.

Donald Pretari October 11, 2011 at 7:37 pm

BTW, this is from my Narrow Banking Searches: “Where to draw lines: stability versus efficiency” Thomas J. Sargent∗ July 2, 2010

mobile October 11, 2011 at 8:28 pm

Just like the Japanese to take 1:35 before they start getting to the point.

Scott Sumner October 11, 2011 at 9:22 pm

Michael, Yup, that’s the one.

Capocaccia October 12, 2011 at 4:11 am

No rudeness whatsoever in Bisin’s post, I can assure. On the contrary, it’s a very clear explanation on why Sargent deserved the prize.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: