Question A:
Because the US has underspent on new projects, maintenance, or both, the federal government has an opportunity to increase average incomes by spending more on roads, railways, bridges and airports. (The experts panel previously voted on this question on May 23, 2013. Those earlier results can be found here.)
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question B:
Past experience of public spending and political economy suggests that if the government spent more on roads, railways, bridges and airports, many of the projects would have low or negative returns. (The experts panel previously voted on this question on May 23, 2013. Those earlier results can be found here.)
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 | ||
|
|
||||
 Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
How do we know that the US has underspent? Investment will probably raise incomes for Keynesian reasons but will it promote growth?
|
||||
 Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Public infrastructure is valuable, and the premise of underspending in this area seems correct. Hence, the conclusion.
|
||||
 Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
public goods matter if chosen well
|
||||
 Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
seems likely but spending not determined by costs and benefits see innovative proposal below lots of efficiency gains w pricing policies
-see background information here |
||||
 Robert Hall |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I would say increase average welfare rather than income. There are surely many potential projects where the social benefit exceeds
cost.
|
||||
 Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
In the long run.
|
||||
 Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I interpret "underspending" to mean that spending more would increase economic productivity. So, yes.
|
||||
 Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
 Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I would rather this be about all kinds, not just physical.
|
||||
 Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
It would increase welfare; income is more difficult to assess.
|
||||
 José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Better regulation and congestion pricing would also help.
|
||||
 Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
This is a no-brainer as regards roads and bridges, but the federal government doesn't do railroads and rarely if ever does airports.
|
||||
 Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
 Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
 Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
Question B Participant Responses
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Past evidence suggests that there will be waste and corruption (a lot of corruption!). But this does not imply that average NPV is negative.
|
||||
|
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Both public and private sector investments are risky. Some infrastructure projects will fail even when most have high social returns.
|
||||
|
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Many does not have to mean most, and on average returns may be quite positive. We just don't know enough right now.
|
||||
|
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The accounting return to the government would be low, but the total returns, include positive social spillovers, could be moderately good.
|
||||
|
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Many projects would no doubt be mistakes, but many is far from most. Most would probably be good investments.
|
||||
|
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
hard to argue with the reality that some money will end up in powerful districts without much need for it when congress controls
|
||||
|
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
currently infra spending does not aim to maximize returns. c. winston research says returns are declining but more research is critical
|
||||
|
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Perhaps sometimes true in the past but I don't think it's inevitable. Projects like the interstate highways are notable exceptions.
|
||||
|
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
The same is true of many investments in the private sector. Hard to imagine the government having a better record than the private sector.
|
||||
|
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Just consider the high speed rail system in California.
|
||||
|
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Depends on what many means, but the perpetual repaving of roads in Chicago is not that atypical of many public projects.
|
||||
|
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Poorly worded. Surely "many" out of 50K miles, but probably not "most."
|
||||
|
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
I could agree with "some," but "many" is not obvious. Also, railroads are privately funded.
|
||||
|
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
|
Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
||||
|
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Same is true for private sector!
|
||||
|
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
||||
