Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Selected Works

Neil H. Buchanan

2005

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Uses Of The Concept Of Efficiency In Tax Analysis, Neil H. Buchanan Dec 2004

The Uses Of The Concept Of Efficiency In Tax Analysis, Neil H. Buchanan

Neil H. Buchanan

The flexibility and ubiquity of the term efficiency in tax analysis can be a double-edged sword. While tax scholars are naturally drawn to the notion of efficiency, with its implied virtues of eliminating waste and of guiding policy choices through objective, non-normative analysis, the danger exists that we can lose sight of which type of efficiency we are talking about when we invoke the concept. What one scholar calls efficient might be quite inefficient under the definition or perspective used by another scholar.


Social Security, Generational Justice, And Long-Term Deficits, Neil H. Buchanan Dec 2004

Social Security, Generational Justice, And Long-Term Deficits, Neil H. Buchanan

Neil H. Buchanan

This paper assesses current methods for evaluating the long-term viability and desirability of government activities, especially Social Security and other big-ticket budget items. I reach four conclusions: (1) There are several simple ways to improve the current debate about fiscal policy by adjusting our crude deficit measures, improvements which ought not to be controversial; (2) separately measuring Social Security's long-term balance is inappropriate and misleading; (3) the methods available to measure very long-term government financing (Fiscal Gaps and their cousins, Generational Accounts) are of very limited value in setting public policy today, principally because there is no reliable baseline of …


Playing With Fire: Feminist Legal Theorists And The Tools Of Economics, Neil H. Buchanan Dec 2004

Playing With Fire: Feminist Legal Theorists And The Tools Of Economics, Neil H. Buchanan

Neil H. Buchanan

During the discussions at Professor Fineman’s recent feminist legal theory workshops, several participants argued that feminists should use the “tools” of mainstream economics to build a more rigorous foundation for their analyses. Feminist legal theorists, it was argued, had their hearts in the right place, but their arguments lacked sufficient intellectual (“hard-headed”) rigor to carry the day. Based on this view, the best strategy would be to use economic tools (which, these participants argued, are value neutral) to build a rigorous, logical foundation on which legal feminists could confidently stand. The problem – which applies to all areas of legal …