Standardized enforcement: Access to justice vs contractual innovation

We model the different ways in which precedents and contract standardization shapethe development of markets and the law. In a setup where more resourceful parties candistort contract enforcement to their advantage, we find that the introduction of astandard contract reduces enforcement distortions relative to precedents, exerting twoeffects: i) it statically expands the volume of trade, but ii) it crowds out the use ofinnovative contracts, hindering contractual innovation. We shed light on the largescale commercial codification occurred in the 19th century in many countries (evenCommon Law ones) during a period of booming commerce and long distance trade.

Reaudit report on the Collins-Maxwell Community School District for the period July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006

Reaudit report on the Collins-Maxwell Community School District for the period July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006

Combined audit report on the eight Judicial District Departments of Correctional Services for the year ended June 30, 2006

Combined audit report on the eight Judicial District Departments of Correctional Services for the year ended June 30, 2006

Audit report on the Iowa Judicial Branch – County Clerks of District Courts, a part of the State of Iowa, for the year ended June 30, 2006

Audit report on the Iowa Judicial Branch – County Clerks of District Courts, a part of the State of Iowa, for the year ended June 30, 2006

Spinning welfare: The gains from process innovation in cotton and car production

Economists and economic historians want to know how much better life is today than in the past.Fifty years ago economic historians found surprisingly small gains from 19th century US railroads,while more recently economists have found relatively large gains from electricity, computers and cellphones. In each case the implicit or explicit assumption is that researchers were measuring the valueof a new good to society. In this paper we use the same techniques to find the value to society ofmaking existing goods cheaper. Henry Ford did not invent the car, and the inventors of mechanisedcotton spinning in the industrial revolution invented no new product. But both made existing productsdramatically cheaper, bringing them into the reach of many more consumers. That in turn haspotentially large welfare effects. We find that the consumer surplus of Henry Ford s production linewas around 2% by 1923, 15 years after Ford began to implement the moving assembly line, while themechanisation of cotton spinning was worth around 6% by 1820, 34 years after its initial invention.Both are large: of the same order of magnitude as consumer expenditure on these items, and as largeor larger than the value of the internet to consumers. On the social savings measure traditionally usedby economic historians, these process innovations were worth 15% and 18% respectively, makingthem more important than railroads. Our results remind us that process innovations can be at least asimportant for welfare and productivity as the invention of new products.

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District, Tax Year 1997

Iowa School District Surtax Report 1997

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District, Tax Year 1998

Iowa School District Surtax Report 1998

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District Report, Tax Year 1999

Iowa School District Surtax Report 1999

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District Report, Tax Year 2000

Iowa School District Surtax Report 2000

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District Report, Tax Year 2001

Iowa School District Surtax Report 2001

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District Report, Tax Year 2002

Iowa School District Surtax Report 2002

Iowa Individual Income Tax School District Report, Tax Year 2003

Iowa School District Surtax Report 2003