Compare opinions of world leading experts and influencers.

Paul Krugman


Robin Hanson


Privatizing Social Security - replacing the current system, in whole or in part, with personal investment accounts - won't do anything to strengthen the system's finances. If anything, it will make things worse. Nonetheless, the politics of privatization depend crucially on convincing the public that the system is in imminent danger of collapse, that we must destroy Social Security in order to save it.
07 Dec 2004    Source
Disagree Could rising health and retirement costs bankrupt the US? Neutral
If the world stays relatively boring, this will be the biggest US politics issue over the next twenty years. The key questions are: 1) Who will pay: raise taxes, limit treatments covered, tax docs, or cut off the richer & younger? 2) Who will be blamed: docs, the old, the young, the rich, the poor, Republicans, Democrats, corporations, immigrants, foreigners?
11 May 2007    Source
Of course, there have always been men of affairs wise enough to see past the current dogma. ...[but the problem is] do the lives of the [investing] sages carry useful lessons for the rest of us? Soros doesn’t really seem to have a method, except that of being smarter than anyone else. Buffett does have a method — figure out what a company is really worth, and buy it if you can get it cheap — but it’s not a method that would work for anyone without his gifts.
06 Aug 2009    Source
Mostly Agree Is efficient market theory the best approximation of the truth for the average investor? Mostly Agree
...variations on the Efficient Markets Hypothesis [depend] on what info counts as “available.” Weak versions only count very widely and easily available info, while strong versions even count info available with difficulty to only a few. The strongest possible forms are silly, and no one ever believed them. Weak versions, which require info to be available to many deep-pocket market speculators, are much more plausible, and I don’t see recent history as offering much evidence against them.
20 Jul 2009    Source
We have a real chance of getting a serious cap and trade program in place within a year or two. We have no chance of getting a carbon tax for the foreseeable future. It’s just destructive to denounce the program we can actually get — a program that won’t be perfect, won’t be enough, but can be made increasingly effective over time — in favor of something that can’t possibly happen in time to avoid disaster.
07 Dec 2009    Source
Agree Does Cap and Trade beat carbon tax for reducing emissions? Disagree
A carbon tax would make price blame clearer, so [Democrats] are going with tradable permits, which also lets them play more favorites with who gets permits. Permits also make it harder to notice if they actually cut carbon, vs. preserving business as usual.
16 Jun 2009    Source
...this rather iffy [study supporting minimum wages] has been seized upon by some liberals as a rationale for making large minimum wage increases a core component of the liberal agenda. Clearly these advocates very much want to believe that the price of labor ... can be set based on considerations of justice, not supply and demand, without unpleasant side effects. ...[They] not only take the [study] as gospel, but advance a number of other arguments that just do not hold up under examination.
01 Sep 1998    Source
Disagree Does minimum wage help the poor? Mostly Disagree
Regarding our best estimate of the employment effect of a small min wage rise, while many have recently said this is near zero, more say it is substantially negative, and I have asked around and found *no* economist who says that it is substantially positive. Thus, I conclude, any reasonable average of these estimates must be negative, and has been so for a while.
05 Dec 2006    Source