Suchergebnisse

To argue about a policy, it helps to know the specifics of the policy being considered. In an Aug 21, 2014, email, Matt Zwolinski told the author that although he can't stand too firmly behind any particular dollar value for a basic-income guarantee, he had in mind $10,000 annually for every US citizen age twenty-one or older. That is the proposal he discusses throughout this essay, unless he specify otherwise. Adapted from the source document.

The article of record as published may be located at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12115-014-9775-0 ; Contrary to the views of some libertarians, "libertarian paternalism" is not an oxymoron. But are its twomost prominent advocates, Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, really libertarian paternalists or are they paternalists in sheep's clothing? Thaler seems to be somewhat of a libertarian paternalist whereas Sunstein appears to be more of a straight coercive paternalist. But even Thaler passes up major chances to advocate reducing straight paternalism by making it more libertarian. Those who favor freedom should not reject the concept of libertarian paternalism altogether. Instead they should apply the concept more consistently than Thaler and Sunstein have doneand use it to push for a less coercive government. Indeed, the fact that government officials who plan our lives also have human foibles argues for less government, not true.

Walter Oi passed away this past Christmas Eve, at the age of 84. I trust that readers of this magazine already know of Walter, but most Americans don't. That's a shame, especially for men age 66 or younger, who owe him special gratitude for the profound effect he had on their lives: he helped end military conscription in the United States.

This article is part of a larger work "Reducing wait times for health care: what Canada can learn from theory and international experience" edited by Steven Globerman for the Fraser Institute. ; One of the main problems with a single-payer health care system, such as Canada's Medicare, is that it causes health care to be rationed. Under Medicare, the provincial governments negotiate physician compensation with provincial medical associations. The provincial governments typically fund hospitals by setting global budgets for government-run regional health authorities. For any medical care from doctors or hospitals that is covered by Medicare, the government-set price to beneficiaries is zero. The result is a shortage: at any given time, some patients want more medical care than is available. Therefore, medical care is rationed; people wait for medical services. Government funded systems typically use triage to ration access to services: the more serious the illness, all else equal, the shorter the wait. Nevertheless, there is a wait, and it is often substantial.

Bob Litterman (p. 38) makes some excellent points about the roles of uncertainty, size of damage, and economic growth in his discussion of how the government should "price" carbon emissions. However, he does not go far enough in considering the role of uncertainty. A deeper appreciation of uncertainty over the effect of carbon emissions on people's lives leads to a wider range of reasonable policies than Litterman considers.

It is not impossible for there to be another economist of Milton Friedman's stature, but it is unlikely. Milton had a rare combination of characteristics. His brilliance showed up in his economics work early in his life and led him to some major contributions that affected the profession's views on Keynesian economics, the causes of the Great Depression, and inflation. But if that had been 'all' he had done, we would not be having this symposium. He also was a passionate, warm man of great integrity. His fight against the military draft, his public appearances on television, and his willingness to give advice to young people all demonstrate those characteristics.

Cronyism is the substitution of political influence for free markets. It comes about when government has a lot of power over private-sector decisions and when the government officials in power have great discretion over how to use it. Cronyism is not simply a zero-sum game that takes from some and gives to others; it is negative-sum. The losses to the losers substantially outweigh the gains to the winners. In short, cronyism destroys wealth. By shifting power to government, cronyism makes political power more important and increases the competition for that political power. The way to reduce or end cronyism is to reduce or end that government power.

Enthält Rezension von: What caused the financial crisis? / Jeffrey Friedman, ed. - Philadelphia/Pa. : Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2011. - 360 S

After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government in the United States took over airline security in all but five airports and dictated standards even for those airports with private security. The federal government regulates in two main ways: by checking passengers with carry-‐on items for bombs, guns, knives, etc. and by checking checked bags for explosives. There has been much discussion of the rationales and efficacy, and even some cost‐benefit analyses of these measures. But no one in the literature has made a clearcut externality argument for government provision of or regulation of airline security.