Second Reply to Bergh
I AM PLEASED THAT IN HIS SECOND COMMENT ANDREAS BERGH (2006b) has decided to â€œtry even harder to recur to the facts,â€ and agrees that on the key econometric front our â€œactual disagreement is very smallâ€ (pp. 452, 453). He also now reveals that he is â€œin fact rather friendly to the welfare state.â€ We seem to have achieved some convergence.
Volume (Year): 3 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Enterprise Hall, Room 354, 4400 University Drive, 3G4 Fairfax, VA 22030|
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: https://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Peter H. Lindert, 2006. "The Welfare State Is the Wrong Target: A Reply to Bergh," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 3(2), pages 236-250, May.
- Andreas Bergh, 2006. "Is the Swedish Welfare State A Free Lunch?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 3(2), pages 210-235, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:3:y:2006:i:3:p:461-465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jason Briggeman)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.