Why Tax Cuts Do Not Create Jobs

This chapter explores the argument that tax cuts produce jobs. The standard argument for why tax cuts increase GDP is that reducing taxes takes money away from wasteful government bureaucrats. The money is put in the hands of entrepreneurs and investors; more investment equals more growth. This argument sounds appealing, but it falls apart for six different reasons. First, in a globalized economy, proceeds from American tax cuts may be invested overseas. Second, firms do not always lower employment when taxes are high. Third, tax breaks and tax evasion reduce the impact of cutting tax rates. Fourth, most business failures are caused by something other than taxation. Fifth, taxes are not the biggest determinant of corporate success. Finally, the data do not show any relationship between taxes and job growth.

Hell and Fault

This chapter addresses issues concerning agential freedom, moral fault, and punishment. It argues that David Lewis is right that there is an especially virulent non-standard argument from evil, which can be seen more clearly by an expansion of his argument. What Lewis calls “the neglected argument” is an argument concerning the rationality of belief in an eternal hell on the part of theists. It is an argument for the incoherence of what Lewis calls the orthodox story concerning God and hell. The argument is not on its own an argument for atheism, since it leaves intact a variety of metaphysical positions, including universalist theism and forms of religiosity other than those involving an affirmation of the existence of a being who is essentially omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good. It stands, nonetheless, as a powerful argument from evil demanding attention from any perfect being theist who endorses the existence of a non-empty eternal hell.

The philosopher’s paradox: How to make a coherent decision in the Newcomb Problem

We offer a novel argument for one-boxing in Newcomb’s Problem. The intentional states of a rational person are psychologically coherent across time, and rational decisions are made against this backdrop. We compare this coherence constraint with a golf swing, which to be effective must include a follow-through after the ball is in flight. Decisions, like golf swings, are extended processes, and their coherence with other psychological states of a player in the Newcomb scenario links her choice with the way she is predicted in a common cause structure. As a result, the standard argument for two-boxing is mistaken.

Frankfurt cases and the Newcomb Problem

A standard argument for one-boxing in Newcomb’s Problem is ‘Why Ain’cha Rich?’, which emphasizes that one-boxers typically make a million dollars compared to the thousand dollars that two-boxers can expect. A standard reply is the ‘opportunity defence’: the two-boxers who made a thousand never had an opportunity to make more. The paper argues that the opportunity defence is unavailable to anyone who grants that in another case—a Frankfurt case—the agent is deprived of opportunities in the way that advocates of Frankfurt cases typically claim.

Presidential Term Limits

This chapter introduces major research questions and themes in the politics of presidential term limits. The institution of term limits can be understood as the dependent variable, as the explanatory variable, as a focal point, and as an indicator—a tripwire. Because of a very “tight” relationship between democracy and term limits, it is more fruitful to approach the study of presidential term limits by carefully accounting for the time period, place and context, the power and preferences of political actors—as in the politics of presidential term limits. The chapter sketches some of the constitutional choices affecting presidential term limits, outlines the standard argument for and against, considers some of the issues involved in the decision to introduce, abolish, or amend term limits. It also points to some of the likely consequences of presidential term limits, distinguishing between direct and informational effects thereof.

On the typical size and cancellations among the coefficients of some modular forms

We obtain a nontrivial upper bound for almost all elements of the sequences of real numbers which are multiplicative and at the prime indices are distributed according to the Sato–Tate density. Examples of such sequences come from coefficients of severalL-functions of elliptic curves and modular forms. In particular, we show that |τ(n)| ⩽n11/2(logn)−1/2+o(1)for a set ofnof asymptotic density 1, where τ(n) is the Ramanujan τ function while the standard argument yields log 2 instead of −1/2 in the power of the logarithm. Another consequence of our result is that in the number of representations ofnby a binary quadratic form one has slightly more than square-root cancellations for almost all integersn.In addition, we obtain a central limit theorem for such sequences, assuming a weak hypothesis on the rate of convergence to the Sato–Tate law. For Fourier coefficients of primitive holomorphic cusp forms such a hypothesis is known conditionally and might be within reach unconditionally using the currently established potential automorphy.

Global Existence for a System of Quasi-Linear Wave Equations in 3D Satisfying the Weak Null Condition

We show global existence of small solutions to the Cauchy problem for a system of quasi-linear wave equations in three space dimensions. The feature of the system lies in that it satisfies the weak null condition, though we permit the presence of some quadratic nonlinear terms which do not satisfy the null condition. Due to the presence of such quadratic terms, the standard argument no longer works for the proof of global existence. To get over this difficulty, we extend the ghost weight method of Alinhac so that it works for the system under consideration. The original theorem of Alinhac for the scalar unknowns is also refined.

The Changing Legacy of Civil War Colonization

Abraham Lincoln supported the colonization of black Americans to Africa and a number of other locations, yet some historians are reluctant to explore this topic because of the implications for what this support means to his legacy as the “Great Emancipator.” The standard argument goes that Lincoln once supported colonization but changed his mind by the time he issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Magness explores new sources to argue against this interpretation. He shows that Lincoln supported colonization until his death, and he explores the implications of this revelation.

Political Liberalism and Political Community

We provide a justification for political liberalism’s Reciprocity Principle, which states that political decisions must be justified exclusively on the basis of considerations that all reasonable citizens can reasonably be expected to accept. The standard argument for the Reciprocity Principle grounds it in a requirement of respect for persons. We argue for a different, but compatible, justification: the Reciprocity Principle is justified because it makes possible a desirable kind of political community. The general endorsement of the Reciprocity Principle, we will argue, helps realize joint political rule and relationships of civic friendship. The main obstacle to the realization of these values is the presence of reasonable disagreement about religious, moral, and philosophical issues characteristic of liberal societies. We show the Reciprocity Principle helps to overcome this obstacle.

Donor blood screening and moral responsibility: how safe should blood be?

Some screening tests for donor blood that are used by blood services to prevent transfusion-transmission of infectious diseases offer relatively few health benefits for the resources spent on them. Can good ethical arguments be provided for employing these tests nonetheless? This paper discusses—and ultimately rejects—three such arguments. According to the ‘rule of rescue’ argument, general standards for cost-effectiveness in healthcare may be ignored when rescuing identifiable individuals. The argument fails in this context, however, because we cannot identify beforehand who will benefit from additional blood screening tests. On the ‘imposed risk’ argument, general cost-effectiveness standards do not apply when healthcare interventions impose risks on patients. This argument ignores the fact that imposing risks on patients is inevitable in healthcare and that these risks can be countered only within reasonable limits. Finally, the ‘manufacturing standard’ argument premises that general cost-effectiveness standards do not apply to procedures preventing the contamination of manufactured medical products. We contend that while this argument seems reasonable insofar as commercially manufactured medical products are concerned, publicly funded blood screening tests should respect the standards for general healthcare. We conclude that these particular arguments are unpersuasive, and we offer directions to advance the debate.