Barrels, both

By the argument Blyth is using building a new gym at Brown is investment, everything that happens in the classroom, being an intangible, is not. But then at Brown, with Blyth, that might actually be true.

We entirely agree that there are different visions of the future we should be striving for. But we would like to at least try and insist that the evidence presented to argue for one or the other be evidence, be observations about the real world. For without that stricture we end up somewhere on the spectrum from being misleading through propaganda to casuistry which really, we do insist, isn’t the way to run the world.

2 thoughts on “Barrels, both”

  1. You need a comma between “using” and “building”. Personally I’d use a semi-colon after “investment”.

    Anyhoo, as you claimed, both barrels. Well said.

    Detailed point: is tax incidence always determined by mobility? I’ve long assumed that it is largely determined by elasticity of supply. Does that boil down to the same thing or have I been, gasp!, wrong?

  2. Elasticity and mobility are much the same concept here. Mobility being, really, a form of greater elasticity of supply.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *