Category: Law
An anti-corruption plan for Indonesia
Indonesia’s anti-drugs agency has proposed building a prison on an island guarded by crocodiles to hold death row convicts, an official said, an idea that wouldn’t be out of place in a James Bond film.
The proposal is the pet project of anti-drugs chief Budi Waseso, who plans to visit various parts of the archipelago in his search for fierce reptiles to guard the jail.
“We will place as many crocodiles as we can there. I will search for the most ferocious type of crocodile,” he was quoted as saying by local news website Tempo.
Waseso said that crocodiles would be better at preventing drug traffickers from escaping prison as they could not be bribed — unlike human guards.
There is more here, via Charles Klingman and Mark Thorson, try this Bond movie clip too.
The Tiebout model taken to an extreme
What if the entire town moves?:
When independent traders in a small Welsh town discovered the loopholes used by multinational giants to avoid paying UK tax, they didn’t just get mad.
Now local businesses in Crickhowell are turning the tables on the likes of Google and Starbucks by employing the same accountancy practices used by the world’s biggest companies, to move their entire town “offshore”.
Advised by experts and followed by a BBC crew, family-run shops in the Brecon Beacons town have submitted their own DIY tax plan to HMRC, copying the offshore arrangements used by global brands which pay little or no corporation tax.
The Powys tax rebellion, led by traders including the town’s salmon smokery, local coffee shop, book shop, optician and bakery, could spread nationwide.
The article is here, via John Chilton. Georgists of the world unite!
The digitization of immigration records
It is going slowly, to say the least:
Heaving under mountains of paperwork, the government has spent more than $1 billion trying to replace its antiquated approach to managing immigration with a system of digitized records, online applications and a full suite of nearly 100 electronic forms.
A decade in, all that officials have to show for the effort is a single form that’s now available for online applications and a single type of fee that immigrants pay electronically. The 94 other forms can be filed only with paper.
This project, run by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, was originally supposed to cost a half-billion dollars and be finished in 2013. Instead, it’s now projected to reach up to $3.1 billion and be done nearly four years from now, putting in jeopardy efforts to overhaul the nation’s immigration policies, handle immigrants already seeking citizenship and detect national security threats, according to documents and interviews with former and current federal officials.
The article is here, hat tip goes to Felix Salmon.
Does the Obamacare mandate actually make people better off?
Here is my latest NYT Upshot column, on the topic of the Affordable Care Act. Here is what is to me the key excerpt:
But there is another way of looking at it, one used in traditional economics, which focuses on how much people are willing to pay as an indication of their real preferences. Using this measure, if everyone covered by the insurance mandate were to buy health insurance as the law dictated, more than half of them would be worse off.
This may seem startling. But in an economic study, researchers measured such preferences by looking at data known as market demand curves. Practically speaking, these demand curves implied that individuals would rather take some risk with their health — and spend their money on other things — partly because they knew that even without insurance they still would receive some health care. These were the findings of a provocative National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, “The Price of Responsibility: The Impact of Health Reform on Non-Poor Uninsureds” by Mark Pauly, Adam Leive, and Scott Harrington; the authors are at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.
One implication is that the preferences of many people subject to the insurance mandate are likely to become more negative in the months ahead. For those without subsidies, federal officials estimate, the cost of insurance policies is likely to increase by an average of another 7.5 percent; even more in states like Oklahoma and Mississippi. The individuals who are likely losers from the mandate have incomes 250 percent or more above the federal poverty level ($11,770 for a single person, more for larger families), the paper said. They are by no means the poorest Americans, but many of them are not wealthy, either. So the Affordable Care Act may not be as egalitarian as it might look initially, once we take this perspective into account.
I should stress that, at this point, I don’t see any realistic alternative to trying to improve ACA. Still, I find it distressing how infrequently this problem is acknowledged or dealt with, probably from a mix of epistemic closure, a “health insurance simply has to make people better off” attitude, and a dose of “let’s not give any ammunition to the enemy.” In fact, I think a lot of Democratic-leaning economists and commentators are doing a real disservice to their own causes on this one.
It’s worth noting that Kentucky, one of the best-functioning ACA state exchanges, just elected a Republican governor who very explicitly pledged to tank the current set-up as much as possible, Medicaid too. I think it’s time to admit this is not just Tea Party activism or Hee Haw political stupidity, rather a large number of the people subject to the mandate simply are not better off as would be judged by their own preferences. And that is not a secondary problem of Obamacare, it is a primary problem.
Interestingly, I found the NYT reader comments on my piece to be fairly supportive, which is not always the case. There’s a good deal of “this happened to me, too,” and not so much raw invective about whatever defects I may have.
I think it is a big mistake to argue Obamacare is on the verge of collapse, or whatever other exaggeration of the day may be at hand. Still, I don’t find the current set-up of the exchanges to be entirely stable, at least not in terms of ongoing popularity, much less consumer sovereignty.
A key question is what happens moving forward. One option, which I had not initially expected, is for the exchanges to narrow and evolve into an expanded version of some of the earlier plans for a segregated high-risk pool. In that case, the argument would morph from “don’t worry, enough people will sign up for the exchanges” into “the welfare effects here are still positive, because fortunately not everyone signs up for the exchanges.” The high risk pool would then at some point require additional subsidies. In the past, I argued that the penalties for not signing up were too low, but under this scenario it may be desirable to lower rather than raise those penalties.
We’ll see. The piece covers other issues as well, do read the whole thing.
Here is Megan on the costs of ACA plans. Here are some interesting calculations from Jed Graham.
Rene Girard has passed away
Here is the Stanford report of his passing, well done, and here are previous MR mentions of Girard. He was one of the world’s great thinkers.
Police steal from you so burglars don’t have to
Police in the East Rock section of New Haven are trying to send a strong message to residents to lock their doors amid several car break-ins and they are doing it an a rather unconventional way.
Starting today, police who notice valuables left in plain view inside unlocked cars will take them to keep them safe from would-be burglars, according to the New Haven Register.
There have been eight car break-ins in one week alone and Lt. Herbert Sharp told the Register that this strategy will prevent burglars from getting expensive items from cars, while forcing residents to make a trip to the police station to pick up belongings.
After taking the valuables, police will either leave a note or call the resident.
There is a noisy video at the link, via Craig Palsson.
Solve for the equilibrium don’t forget to check your email
In early October, the [German] district government informed Sumte’s mayor, Christian Fabel, by email that his village of 102 people just over the border in what was once Communist East Germany would take in 1,000 asylum seekers.
His wife, the mayor said, assured him it must be a hoax.
Here is the NYT article, you will note that Herr Holger Niemann is enthusiastic about the new development; he is the lone neo-Nazi on the local town council. By the way, the town has no stores, they had to install more pumps in the sewer system, and if I understand the article correctly Sumte has no permanent police presence.
At lunch lately we have been arguing how many immigrants can be taken in without seeing political backlash and eventually immigration reduction. We’ll soon be seeing more data.
But how exactly are they cheating?
A man who sold himself a $1,000,000 winning D.C. Lottery ticket is just one of many retailers a WUSA9 investigation found winning the lottery at rates statisticians say border on impossible.
At least three retailers won the lottery around 100 times according to an analysis of D.C. Lottery records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.
“$10,000, $5,000,” Lounes Issaad said about some of his 27 payouts that averaged $30,000 each. “I don’t have nothing to hide.”
…Our investigation found lottery retailers make up at least three of the top five D.C. Lottery frequent winners – all with about 100 wins or more.
There is more here (the link makes some noise), via Michael Rosenwald.
Does India Need a New Constitution?
Writing in Quartz, Atanu Dey and Rajesh Jain have a very interesting argument that historically slow growth and many of India’s other problems can be traced back to its extractive constitution, which was largely inherited from the British.
For nearly a century, India was under comprehensive colonial British rule. As can be rationally expected, the government that the British imposed on India was not primarily directed towards development, but rather towards extraction. That is only reasonable because wealth extraction is the rationale for colonial rule.
The British, therefore, created the institutional structures, which necessarily includes the government that controlled India through comprehensive government control of the economy. This structure administration and control was left intact when the British decided to leave India, and was taken over by the government of Independent India. Although India attained political independence from the British raj, Indians did not become free of a controlling—and extractive—government.
…The conclusion has to be that India’s problem is structural and systemic, and not idiosyncratic. If the constitution were to change, the ultimate rules of the game would change, the policies (the derived rules) will change, and thus the action on the ground (the play of the game) will change, and therefore the outcome will change.
India needs a new constitution that is consistent with a nation of free individuals living in a complex, modern, large economy. This modern constitution has to be one that guarantees economic freedom to the individual, prohibits the government from making any laws that discriminate among citizens, guarantees freedom of speech and the press, prohibits the government from entering into businesses that are properly the domain of the private sector, and so on. In other words, India needs a constitution that protects the comprehensive freedom of the individual: economic, social and political.
What would be the best form of constitution for India? Westminster or Presidential? First past the post or proportional rule? Single-member or mixed-member districts? Plurality rule or Borda count? Federalism? Certainly. But what kind of federalism enforced in what way? A Supreme court? How appointed? And what would be the most important rights to codify in a bill of rights?
The drone wars have begun, a continuing series
A man dubbed the Drone Slayer for shooting a miniature aircraft out of the sky has had a criminal case against him thrown out.
William Meredith drew his shotgun and took out a Phantom 3 drone after spotting it above his home in Hillview, Kentucky, this summer – landing him in jail and prompting legal proceedings.
Mr Meredith was charged with criminal mischief and wanton endangerment for destroying the $900 drone in July – but this week had both of them thrown out by a judge.
Did China’s one-child policy have benefits?
As a leader I would never institute a one-child policy, which I consider to be an immoral restriction on personal liberty. But if we ask whether this policy had benefits for China, it absolutely did.
For instance the policy made China a more educated society more rapidly. It is simple economics that putting a lot of money into the education of each child is easier to do with a single child than with three or for that matter seven kids. The effects of the one-child policy are illustrated through a natural experiment of sorts. Chinese children who ended up born into twin pairs showed significantly slower rates of schooling progress, worse grades, lower chances of college enrollment, and worse health. These differences do not follow mainly from the lower birth weight of twins or other birth-related problems (though that is one factor), but rather they stem from the lower resources which are invested in children in larger families.
See Rosenzweig and Zhang, Review of Economic Studies 2009.
By the way, the one-child policy was not the main reason why Chinese fertility fell. Between 1970 and 1979, before the policy was put in place, the total fertility rate fell dramatically from 5.9 to 2.9. After the policy was introduced, the total fertility rate actually fell more gradually than during that earlier stretch, settling into 1.7 by 1995. The best estimate we have is that the one-child policy lowered Chinese births by an average of 0.33 per woman, which is a noticeable but not drastic change.
Even in purely practical terms, it is highly likely the policy has been obsolete for some while.
See Therese Hesketh, Li Lu, and Zhu Wei Xing. “The Effect of China’s One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years.” New England Journal of Medicine, September 15, 2005, 1171-1176, and Marjorie McElroy and Dennis Tao Yang. “Carrots and Sticks: Fertility Effects of China’s Population Policies.” American Economic Review, May 2000, 389-392.
Ho-fung Hung’s *The China Boom*
So many books on China recycle the same stories and historical anecdotes, but this one tells the story from the point of view of economic history. It is scholarly yet readable, interesting throughout but best in the first half, runs up through contemporary times, and does not have too much overlap with any other China book. Here is one excerpt:
The urban entrepreneurial elite in eighteenth-century England benefited from absolute and unconditional support from the state, which shielded them against resistance from below. This support was justified by the increasingly dominant ideology of classical political economy…The dominance of this ideology can be understood against the backdrop of Europe’s interstate conflict that urged state makers to ally with capital in building up its military capacity…The entrepreneurial elite in eighteenth-century China, in contrast, enjoyed only relative and conditional support from the state. It is true that the Qing state elite never saw the mercantile elite as their antinomies and were diligent in facilitating their business and helping them secure their property rights in merchant-merchant or merchant-official disputes…But when it came to managing conflict between entrepreneurial profits and subsistence of the poor, the state elite often favored the latter at the expense of the former.
File under capitalist oppression is underrated.
Definitely recommended, you can buy the book here.
Obamacare rate increases in Mississippi
Mississippi will be ground zero for ObamaCare’s individual mandate to buy coverage or pay a tax penalty.
The state already is near the bottom when it comes to the percentage of the subsidy-eligible individuals who are enrolled via HealthCare.gov — just 38%. Now Mississippi’s subsidized premiums are about to jump far more than any of the 36 other states using HealthCare.gov.
For 30-year-olds in Yazoo City earning about $25,000 (214% of the poverty level), the after-subsidy cost of the cheapest bronze plan will spike by $554, or 60%, in 2016.
There is more here. To be sure that is lemon picking from the data, but in politics the people who suffer the most often end up with the biggest say. Furthermore the reported seven percent average rate hike is not so small either, so perhaps the Mississippi story will resonate. Here is more on the ambiguity in the numbers on reported rate increases. Still, this is not developing in a favorable manner.
The German radical Left Party wishes to deregulate walking
From Greek bailouts to traffic signals, Germans pride themselves on respecting the rules. But on the latter point at least, even some here believe that fixation has gone too far. All this standing and waiting by cyclists and pedestrians is killing the appeal of muscle-powered locomotion, critics say.
Germany’s radical Left Party, the biggest opposition force in parliament, now wants to do something about this obsession. In November, the party plans to introduce a motion that would end red-light fines for pedestrians and bikers.
There is more here, via Samir Varma.
China fact of the day
The number of people sitting the 2015 qualification exam for broadcasters and TV hosts more than doubled from the previous year as China has tightened the ban on hosts without a certificate.
A total of 13,311 people sat the test on Sunday, compared with 5,908 in 2014. Some well-known hosts also took Sunday’s test, according to the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television.
The soaring number of examinees was believed to be resulted from a circular the administration issued in June. The circular banned guest hosts in any TV shows, including news, commentary and interview panels, reiterating that all TV hosts must have vocational qualifications.
The article is here, via Adam Minter.