The fundamental issues in the controversy of the policy paradigms: Policies, theories, and underpinnings

Whether or not paradigm (1), as a word, is or is not an overstatement, in this essay I will identify the differences between and the sources of two policy programs. From the journalistic (popular) standpoint, policy differences stand out most vividly when programs are compared. But often the real differences lie at the underpinnings. What are these underpinnings? Are they at the theory level (where most economists generally believe such matters start), or do they appear, as I believe, long before particular theories are selected and examined? Should one dispense with opening the examination at the theoretical level? Indeed, is the study of where to start (at the level of policy, at the level of theory, or even deeper) really the economist's problem? Had this better be left to methodologists and philosophers? I think not (2). I undertake a different course and suggest that we start not with the theories but with the consideration of two policy programs, which I will try to synthesize. Thereafter, I will use personal nouns to describe the theoretical tents housing these policies. Finally, I hope that we can agree on looking at the ground where the underpinnings are anchored. In so doing, I find myself in good methodological company. Hayek, for one, endorses this method (1). I term my two basic policy groups the Kiel-Schumpeter Policy Set and the Principal Keynesian Policy Set. The former I associate with the views of Herbert Giersch, although he has repeatedly suggested that he got them from his reading of the works of Joseph A. Schumpeter. The latter, as the concept is expressed, draws more than a little from Alan Coddington's metaphor, the Hydraulic Keynesians [Coddington, 1976, pp. 1263-1267].

The fundamental issues in the controversy of the policy paradigms: Policies, theories, and underpinnings

Whether or not paradigm (1), as a word, is or is not an overstatement, in this essay I will identify the differences between and the sources of two policy programs. From the journalistic (popular) standpoint, policy differences stand out most vividly when programs are compared. But often the real differences lie at the underpinnings. What are these underpinnings? Are they at the theory level (where most economists generally believe such matters start), or do they appear, as I believe, long before particular theories are selected and examined? Should one dispense with opening the examination at the theoretical level? Indeed, is the study of where to start (at the level of policy, at the level of theory, or even deeper) really the economist's problem? Had this better be left to methodologists and philosophers? I think not (2). I undertake a different course and suggest that we start not with the theories but with the consideration of two policy programs, which I will try to synthesize. Thereafter, I will use personal nouns to describe the theoretical tents housing these policies. Finally, I hope that we can agree on looking at the ground where the underpinnings are anchored. In so doing, I find myself in good methodological company. Hayek, for one, endorses this method (1). I term my two basic policy groups the Kiel-Schumpeter Policy Set and the Principal Keynesian Policy Set. The former I associate with the views of Herbert Giersch, although he has repeatedly suggested that he got them from his reading of the works of Joseph A. Schumpeter. The latter, as the concept is expressed, draws more than a little from Alan Coddington's metaphor, the Hydraulic Keynesians [Coddington, 1976, pp. 1263-1267]

Multi-type branching processes with time dependent branching rates

Under mild non-degeneracy assumptions on branching rates in each generation, we provide a criterion for almost-sure extinction of a multi-type branching process with time-dependent branching rates. We also provide a criterion for the total number of particles (conditioned on survival and divided by the expectation of the resulting random variable) to approach an exponential random variable as time goes to infinity

Seventy-four Christian experiences: a comparative study of experiences from four different traditions

In our investigation of religious experiences, one interesting set of questions is, ‘Do Christians of different kinds - Catholic, “Middle-of-the-Road”, Evangelical or Charismatic, have different kinds of religious experiences, or have them in different circumstances? Do some of them tend, more than others, to see visions of the Virgin, or of Jesus, have “conversion” experiences or find themselves in mystical or strange sensory states?’. Professor Lawrence Brown, a former Director of the Religious Experience Research Centre, and Professor Michael Argyle, then a Trustee, suggested that I might carry out a study to examine and compare the experiences of current members of a wide variety of Christian churches, and three members of the Alister Hardy Society were approached who kindly agreed to help with a pilot. I decided to use as my technique the un-timed, unstructured interview, supplemented if necessary by questions designed only to clarify and elucidate. As a former personal counsellor, I was aware of the necessity of being warm, non-judgemental and empathetically (and in this context silently) encouraging. I asked my volunteers to tell me about any ‘relatively short, intense spiritual experience’ they might have had, the attendant circumstances and any possible ‘triggers’, and what had been the final effects or outcomes. To provide some quantitative data it was proposed to ask participants to rate aspects of their experiences on a scale of 1 to 5

Capturing the temporal sequence of interaction in young siblings

We explored whether young children exhibit subtypes of behavioral sequences during sibling interaction. Ten-minute, free-play observations of over 300 sibling dyads were coded for positivity, negativity and disengagement. The data were analyzed using growth mixture modeling (GMM). Younger (18-month-old) children’s temporal behavioral sequences showed a harmonious (53%) and a casual (47%) class. Older (approximately four-year-old) children’s behavior was more differentiated revealing a harmonious (25%), a deteriorating (31%), a recovery (22%) and a casual (22%) class. A more positive maternal affective climate was associated with more positive patterns. Siblings’ sequential behavioral patterns tended to be complementary rather than reciprocal in nature. The study illustrates a novel use of GMM and makes a theoretical contribution by showing that young children exhibit distinct types of temporal behavioral sequences that are related to parenting processes

A survey of X-ray emission from 100 kpc radio jets

We have completed a Chandra snapshot survey of 54 radio jets that are extended on arcsec scales. These are associated with flat spectrum radio quasars spanning a redshift range z=0.3 to 2.1. X-ray emission is detected from the jet of approximately 60% of the sample objects. We assume minimum energy and apply conditions consistent with the original Felten-Morrison calculations in order to estimate the Lorentz factors and the apparent Doppler factors. This allows estimates of the enthalpy fluxes, which turn out to be comparable to the radiative luminosities.Comment: Conference Proceedings IAU Symposium No. 313, Extragalactic jets from every angle, pp. 219-224, 4 figure

BL Lac X-ray Spectra: simpler than we thought

We report results from {\it XMM-Newton} observations of thirteen X-ray bright BL Lacertae objects, selected from the {\it Einstein} Slew Survey sample. The spectra are generally well fit by power-law models, with four objects having hard ($\alpha<1; F_\nu \propto \nu^{-\alpha}$) spectra that indicates synchrotron peaks at $>5$ keV. None of our spectra show line features, indicating that soft X-ray absorption ``notches'' must be rare amongst BL Lacs, rather than common or ubiquitous as had previously been asserted. We find significant curvature in most of the spectra. This curvature is almost certainly intrinsic, as it appears nearly constant from 0.5 to 6 keV, an observation which is inconsistent with the small columns seen in these sources.Comment: 4 pages, 1 figure; to be published in proceedings of the Cozumel meeting on "Multiwavelength Surveys for AGN", Cozumel 200