Question A:
The federal government would make the average U.S. citizen better off by using policies that directly focus more on increasing manufacturing employment than employment in other sectors.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question B:
Because firms and inventors do not capture the full returns from research and development, the government would increase the average well-being of Americans (and potentially of others too) by favoring R&D using the tax code.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question A Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Holding wages constant, manufacturing jobs appeal more to non-college males, the group whose employment rate is falling most rapidly.
|
||||
 Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The counter argument is knowledge or other spillovers in manufacturing.
|
||||
 Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
A caveat -- the auto bailout was manufacturing specific and more valuable than the equivalent policy spread across the economy as a whole
|
||||
 Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Its not obvious that this policy addresses an important externality and has low unintended consequences.
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Most workers don't work in manufacturing, so such policies are apt to redistribute from the average person to manufacturing workers.
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
It would make average Americans better off by focusing on and helping to finance investments in skills and training useful in manufacturing.
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Claudia Goldin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
depends what policy it is
|
||||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Tremendously complicated. Many US manufactured goods have high profit margins, so correcting the distortion would help us and others
|
||||
 Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The average American benefits from lower prices, not from any preference for manufacturing.
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Memo to Romney and Obama: there is nothing per se special about manufacturing (except maybe nostalgia).
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Rents, externalities may be higher than in other sectors (evidence is not clear cut). Higher national saving (needed!) would help U.S. mfg.
-see background information here |
||||
 Edward Lazear |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Don't see why gov't as a rule should directly subsidize manufacturing, though education, science, trade policy could indirectly benefit.
|
||||
 Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is the argument of the Physiocrats in modern dress. Picking winners, even broadly defined, is rarely good policy.
|
||||
 Hyun Song Shin |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Governments are usually poor at "picking winners."
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This or any other "industrial policy" is only as good as the implementation.
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Manufacturing vs. Others isn't an appropriate classification; instead provide a good overall environment, look for targeted externalities.
|
||||
 Luigi Zingales |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I depends what you mean with average citizen. Lower educated people would probably benefit at the expense of others.
|
||||
Question B Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Unclear if R&D credits induce R&D at the margin or mostly reward inframarginal R&D. I prefer govt fund basic research directly (NIH, NSF).
|
||||
|
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Same argument suggests role for public support of university research.
|
||||
|
Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
If the positive R&D externality seems plausible, it makes sense to subsidize. There are some cases in which this has worked (universities).
|
||||
|
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
More innovation is almost surely good, and more R&D spending may increase innovation.
|
||||
|
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Claudia Goldin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
among many ways
|
||||
|
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Nordhaus has shown how much leakage of ideas occurs into the worldwide public domain. Of course, the US would capture only a quarter of gain
|
||||
|
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The relatively small cost of R&D subsidies is an effective way to support continued high American productivity.
|
||||
|
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Not sure of the magnitudes of the distortions once we account for patents and other R&D policies
|
||||
|
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Caveat is that there are Type I and Type II errors in identifying research activities to receive special tax treatment.
-see background information here |
||||
|
Edward Lazear |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I'd be inclined toward policies fostering basic science and innovation that commercial applications can build on.
|
||||
|
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
One would need to be careful to define R&D fairly narrowly. But it is hard to argue that there are no spillovers from comercial R&D.
|
||||
|
Hyun Song Shin |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Again impossible to say without details. Would prefer lower tax rate and broader tax.
|
||||
|
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Not just tax code. Other policies like advance market commitments and (of course) a thorough reform of patent policy.
|
||||
|
Luigi Zingales |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
If you tink of fundamental research is probably true. If you think about research in general, even the premise might be wrong
|
||||
