|Daron Acemoglu||MIT||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Alberto Alesina||Harvard||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Joseph Altonji||Yale||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Alan Auerbach||Berkeley||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|David Autor||MIT||Strongly Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|Katherine Baicker||Harvard||Strongly Agree||4||Bio/Vote History|
|Abhijit Banerjee||MIT||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Marianne Bertrand||Chicago||Agree||4||Bio/Vote History|
Ensuring competition between various providers like Uber, Lyft, etc. is essential besides insurance and background checks for drivers.
|Raj Chetty||Harvard||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Judith Chevalier||Yale||Strongly Agree||9||
Pretty much the same as removing the cap on the number of medallions.
|Janet Currie||Princeton||Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|David Cutler||Harvard||Strongly Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Angus Deaton||Princeton||Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
Competition on quality and price helps consumers. We also have some evidence from revealed preference. Uber was popular right away.
|Aaron Edlin||Berkeley||Agree||9||Bio/Vote History|
|Barry Eichengreen||Berkeley||Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Liran Einav||Stanford||Strongly Agree||9||Bio/Vote History|
|Ray Fair||Yale||Agree||6||Bio/Vote History|
|Amy Finkelstein||MIT||Strongly Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|Pinelopi Goldberg||Yale||Agree||6||Bio/Vote History|
|Austan Goolsbee||Chicago||Strongly Agree||10||
yes. yes. a thousand times yes. Instead, try calling for a cab on Saturday night from the south side of Chicago and see what happens.
|Michael Greenstone||Chicago||Strongly Agree||8||
yes. part of the gain in consumer welfare though comes from undermining property rights of taxi medallion owners.
|Robert Hall||Stanford||Strongly Agree||7||
Disclosure: My economist son serves in Uber's economics department.
|Oliver Hart||Harvard||Strongly Agree||10||
I don't see any externalities. According to standard economics, competition enhances welfare and I believe that would be true here.
Qualification: foreigners, who tend to assume fares are regulated, can be taken advantage of without any price caps. No problem with Uber.
|Caroline Hoxby||Stanford||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Hilary Hoynes||Berkeley||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Kenneth Judd||Stanford||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Steven Kaplan||Chicago||Strongly Agree||10||
New technology / information more than offset any net benefits of regulation.
|Anil Kashyap||Chicago||Strongly Agree||9||
They innovate: e.g.knowing the rating of the driver who will come and haivng an easy way to find a lost phone after you take the ride.
|Pete Klenow||Stanford||Strongly Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Jonathan Levin||Stanford||Strongly Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Eric Maskin||Harvard||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|William Nordhaus||Yale||Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Emmanuel Saez||Berkeley||Agree||6||Bio/Vote History|
Consumer welfare may rise (though difficult to measure), but it will not be a Pareto improvement for consumers, making evaluation difficult.
|José Scheinkman||Princeton||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Richard Schmalensee||MIT||Strongly Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Carl Shapiro||Berkeley||Strongly Agree||10||Bio/Vote History|
|Robert Shimer||Chicago||Strongly Agree||8||
This is in comparison to banning these services or regulating their price to equal the price of taxis.
But Uber needs to be careful about surge pricing in emergencies, people care about fairness as much as efficiency.
|Christopher Udry||Yale||Strongly Agree||9||
One can imagine circumstances in which this would not be true, but this is a situation in which the simple economics are very persuasive.
This panel explores the extent to which economists agree or disagree on major public policy issues. To assess such beliefs we assembled this panel of expert economists. Statistics teaches that a sample of (say) 40 opinions will be adequate to reflect a broader population if the sample is representative of that population.
To that end, our panel was chosen to include distinguished experts with a keen interest in public policy from the major areas of economics, to be geographically diverse, and to include Democrats, Republicans and Independents as well as older and younger scholars. The panel members are all senior faculty at the most elite research universities in the United States. The panel includes Nobel Laureates, John Bates Clark Medalists, fellows of the Econometric society, past Presidents of both the American Economics Association and American Finance Association, past Democratic and Republican members of the President's Council of Economics, and past and current editors of the leading journals in the profession. This selection process has the advantage of not only providing a set of panelists whose names will be familiar to other economists and the media, but also delivers a group with impeccable qualifications to speak on public policy matters.
Finally, it is important to explain one aspect of our voting process. In some instances a panelist may neither agree nor disagree with a statement, and there can be two very different reasons for this. One case occurs when an economist is an expert on a topic and yet sees the evidence on the exact claim at hand as ambiguous. In such cases our panelists vote "uncertain". A second case relates to statements on topics so far removed from the economist's expertise that he or she feels unqualified to vote. In this case, our panelists vote "no opinion".
The Economic Experts Panel questions are emailed individually to the members of the panel, and each responds electronically at his or her convenience. Panelists may consult whatever resources they like before answering.
Members of the public are free to suggest questions (see link below), and the panelists suggest many themselves. Members of the IGM faculty are responsible for deciding the final version of each week’s question. We usually send a draft of the question to the panel in advance, and invite them to point out problems with the wording if they see any. In response, we typically receive a handful of suggested clarifications from individual experts. This process helps us to spot inconsistencies, and to reduce vagueness or problems of interpretation.
The panel data are copyrighted by the Initiative on Global Markets and are being analyzed for an article to appear in a leading peer-reviewed journal.