Read this article
- Access statistics
- 5,904 article downloads
- 7,840 complete issue downloads
- Total: 13,744
In the September 2007 critique of Alamar and Glantz, I argued that smoking in restaurants (and bars) does not constitute an externality and that Alamar and Glantz’s use of cross-sectional data to derive a price/sales ratio did not show us a meaningful picture of what happened before and after the California smoking ban. Here I show that Alamar and Glantz’ reply mainly failed to engage my main points. I end with a challenge.
This article is a response to Smoking in Restaurants: A Reply to David Henderson by Benjamin C. Alamar and Stanton A. Glantz (EJW, September 2007).
Response to this article by Benjamin C. Alamar and Stanton A. Glantz: Externalities in the Workplace: A Response to a Rejoinder to a Response to a Response to a Paper (EJW, May 2008).