Reality bites, but Texans have a weak response to pain.

I'm an economist and here's my response to this post, which does NOT incline me to read this book. First, economists do not have power per se, as that's held by politicians. Second, the Keynesians were/are interventionists; many free market economists would have told governments to leave the market alone (but DO take care of people via political mechanisms). Third -- and I heard this on day one of grad school -- there is ALWAYS someone asking economists what to do. Not surprisingly, some economists like answering, whether or not they are right. This post (the book?) therefore misses the forest (how economics helps us think about choices, etc) for its focus on a few trees (the economists who promise outcomes). I work "just across the road" from the Author, so it may be good to have a chat about what some OTHER economists think :) David Zetland Assistant professor of economics Leiden University College

Don't forget that the EXISTENCE of such a tax may remind consumers to rethink their demand (and thus shift it in), which may mean you're imputing too much elasticity to price.

Damn that sucks...

What a disaster. It's like saying "rights" without adding "obligations" I will use this for my Enviro Econ CBA discussion...

Congrats!

I had an email chat with him... http://www.aguanomics.com/2016/11/trumped-up-polices.html

Arg! Using this baptists and bootleggers example: http://www.aguanomics.com/2016/10/dark-age-ahead-review.html

Someone's gonna pay for that stadium and it's NOT going to be the team owners!

As I write to Tracy in an email, this book (and his support for its pro-suburban argument) is biased by American car culture and distaste for neighborhoods and communities. Here in Amsterdam (and the NL in general), it's easy to have a dense neighborhood that's friendly to families, where it's not necessary to have a car. (You should see mommies with 2 kids on the bike.)

(1) There are some false positives on Beall's list (2) Aren't economists *supposed* to be good at cost minimization? From what I've read in emails, these guys can get you in print -- peer reviewed! -- in less than a week :-\

Statistically significant (1000/1 million!) but not relevant. How about comparing "sexy" to "boring"?

(1) I agree with Paul (2) This will be "solved" by the shit hitting the fan and people "saving" themselves. Those who wait for subsidized moving trucks (or ships) are going to drown -- assuming they'd rather stay to save the sofa and flat screen rather than getting out. (3) Never believe an extrapolation to the population from a marginal statistic

I'm no scientist but this is not a surprise when you consider fossil fuels as the start of GHG emissions...

Sounds like USACE *still* needs to understand cost/benefit, i.e., what to do FIRST!

I'll take 'em on! Permanent contract and no chance of publishing a water-related piece in AER-anything! ;)

We're all equal on a log scale :)

ResearchGate is the Watergate of research. A disgrace.

Bravo!

Yep. Proven quality! (That said, you've seen the studies where published -- heavily cited -- papers are rejected by similar journals... so there's a problem with consistency)

Did I miss the part where "user pays" (or repays debt) ? There are only three ways to fund infra: taxes, transfers or tariffs. The debt structure hardly matters compared to repayment method!

Yes, they both had widespread impacts... that weakened and reversed community (him) and sustainability (her) for future generations that are STILL paying for that path dependency. Don't forget that the likes of Jacobs and Ostrom argued the opposite. A pity the roles weren't reversed!

Yes on #1. #3: LOTS of places that are now quite nice (temp, precip, sea) will be uninhabitable (or less so) with CC, and the resulting land use mess is NOT going to be easy to clear up via markets (since gov't plays a big role in zoning, property rights, infra, etc.)

I'm all for VSL if we can use it to get rid of Daylight savings (cost $275million in dead people) https://twitter.com/aguanomics/status/714828708352303104

Skimmed the paper, which is even more silly with physical models than I expcted. Sadly, it seems that the author missed the role of storage in smoothing scarcity? Groundwater anyone?