BOOK FORUM
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
This forum can be viewed live or in archive form.
Featuring the author, Tom G. Palmer, General Director, Atlas Global Initiative for Free Trade, Peace, and Prosperity, and Senior Fellow, Cato Institute; with comments by Tyler Cowen, Professor of Economics, George Mason University, and General Director, Mercatus Center.
Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice | Cato Institute: Book Forum
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Summary Austrian Economics
Mario Rizzo writes of Austrian economics.
The highly interrelated themes I listed are:
(1) the subjective, yet socially embedded, quality of human decision making;
(2) the individual’s perception of the passage of time (‘real time’);
(3) the radical uncertainty of expectations;
(4) the decentralization of explicit and tacit knowledge in society;
(5) the dynamic market processes generated by individual action, especially entrepreneurship;
(6) the function of the price system in transmitting knowledge;
(7) the supplementary role of cultural norms and other cultural products (‘institutions’) in conveying knowledge;
(8) the spontaneous – that is, not centrally directed – evolution of social institutions.
The highly interrelated themes I listed are:
(1) the subjective, yet socially embedded, quality of human decision making;
(2) the individual’s perception of the passage of time (‘real time’);
(3) the radical uncertainty of expectations;
(4) the decentralization of explicit and tacit knowledge in society;
(5) the dynamic market processes generated by individual action, especially entrepreneurship;
(6) the function of the price system in transmitting knowledge;
(7) the supplementary role of cultural norms and other cultural products (‘institutions’) in conveying knowledge;
(8) the spontaneous – that is, not centrally directed – evolution of social institutions.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Where conservatives have it wrong - The Boston Globe
On the whole, illegal immigrants are just the sort of newcomers Americans should embrace: self-motivated risk-takers, strivers determined to improve themselves, hard-working men and women willing to take the meanest jobs if it will give them a shot at building their own American dream.
Where conservatives have it wrong - The Boston Globe
Where conservatives have it wrong - The Boston Globe
Friday, November 20, 2009
What Makes a Nation Rich? One Economist's Big Answer
November 18, 2009, 9:00 AM
What Makes a Nation Rich? One Economist's Big Answer
Say you're a world leader and you want your country's economy to prosper. According to this Clark Medal winner from MIT, there's a simple solution: start with free elections.
Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/best-and-brightest-2009/world-poverty-map-1209#ixzz0XPLjfQ4G
What Makes a Nation Rich? One Economist's Big Answer
What Makes a Nation Rich? One Economist's Big Answer
Say you're a world leader and you want your country's economy to prosper. According to this Clark Medal winner from MIT, there's a simple solution: start with free elections.
Read more: http://www.esquire.com/features/best-and-brightest-2009/world-poverty-map-1209#ixzz0XPLjfQ4G
What Makes a Nation Rich? One Economist's Big Answer
Monday, November 16, 2009
Liberty: Shaping attitudes toward liberty, choice and responsibility
Boyes speculates, over on Liberty, on the underlying causes for what appears to be a shift in the general attitude toward capitalism and freedom.
In part, he wonders what influence the institution of higher education plays in shaping the underlying belief system of the general population. Dan Klein has analysis that plays into this discussion - http://www.criticalreview.com/2004/pdfs/klein_stern.pdf. He concludes that instructors in the social sciences at the college level are overwhelmingly consist in their selection of government driven policies over market driven policies.
Klein in other work, describes the process by which ideologies govern hiring decisions in colleges, that is faculty who serve on hiring committees tend to select colleagues from institutions similar those attended by the incumbent faculty. This would imply that the newly hired faculty have shared beliefs.
This begs the question of the level of impact or influence that college faculty exert over undergraduates. That is, do the beliefs and attitudes of faculty (who in social sciences at least) appear to be heavily weighted toward pro government/interventionist policies and hostile to market policies driven by liberty and freedom have an impact upon undergraduates? This is an important question and the data that Boyes cites suggests that there is in fact a relationship at work that extends the incumbent ideology to students.
So, to the extent that this relationship exists, a part of the explanation may lie with higher education.
I wonder to what extent the institution of the media plays a role in the pro interventionist ideology that seems to be evolving in the US today? That is, can the various channels of the media be seen to have a predominant ideology in regard to freedom, liberty and choice and, if so, is that ideology pro or anti free market?
Another institution that would seem to play a part in the evolution of attitude is religion. Economic freedom and the resulting growth and expansion of choice and standard of living have been limited to a very few countries. The recent discussion over on CATO regarding modernity points out the central role played by institutions and the apparent change in America in attitude toward capitalism naturally raises the question has there been a change in the institution of religion that may have simulated or supported this change?
The intersection of the two above institutions can be seen here:
Boyes motivates us to consider what factors that have lead to an important change in the informal belief systems in the US that directly and indirectly impact liberty and freedom.
In part, he wonders what influence the institution of higher education plays in shaping the underlying belief system of the general population. Dan Klein has analysis that plays into this discussion - http://www.criticalreview.com/2004/pdfs/klein_stern.pdf. He concludes that instructors in the social sciences at the college level are overwhelmingly consist in their selection of government driven policies over market driven policies.
Klein in other work, describes the process by which ideologies govern hiring decisions in colleges, that is faculty who serve on hiring committees tend to select colleagues from institutions similar those attended by the incumbent faculty. This would imply that the newly hired faculty have shared beliefs.
This begs the question of the level of impact or influence that college faculty exert over undergraduates. That is, do the beliefs and attitudes of faculty (who in social sciences at least) appear to be heavily weighted toward pro government/interventionist policies and hostile to market policies driven by liberty and freedom have an impact upon undergraduates? This is an important question and the data that Boyes cites suggests that there is in fact a relationship at work that extends the incumbent ideology to students.
So, to the extent that this relationship exists, a part of the explanation may lie with higher education.
I wonder to what extent the institution of the media plays a role in the pro interventionist ideology that seems to be evolving in the US today? That is, can the various channels of the media be seen to have a predominant ideology in regard to freedom, liberty and choice and, if so, is that ideology pro or anti free market?
Another institution that would seem to play a part in the evolution of attitude is religion. Economic freedom and the resulting growth and expansion of choice and standard of living have been limited to a very few countries. The recent discussion over on CATO regarding modernity points out the central role played by institutions and the apparent change in America in attitude toward capitalism naturally raises the question has there been a change in the institution of religion that may have simulated or supported this change?
The intersection of the two above institutions can be seen here:
Boyes motivates us to consider what factors that have lead to an important change in the informal belief systems in the US that directly and indirectly impact liberty and freedom.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Investors.com - He Spoke Out For Capitalism
Peter Boettke, a professor of political economy at George Mason University in Virginia, likens capitalism's success to a horse race.
One horse, named Schumpeter, represents innovation. The second horse, called Smith, stands for free trade. The third is government "and its stupid decisions," Boettke said.
"As long as the first two horses stay ahead of the stupid horse, the economy's cycles are manageable," he told IBD. "The trouble happens when the stupid horse's nose gets in front by (creating) policies that restrict trade or are anti-technology."
One horse, named Schumpeter, represents innovation. The second horse, called Smith, stands for free trade. The third is government "and its stupid decisions," Boettke said.
"As long as the first two horses stay ahead of the stupid horse, the economy's cycles are manageable," he told IBD. "The trouble happens when the stupid horse's nose gets in front by (creating) policies that restrict trade or are anti-technology."
Saturday, November 14, 2009
No solutions
Thomas Sowell has said that economics helps you understand that there are no solutions, only tradeoffs. In that spirit, I want to recommend Arnold Kling’s study of the financial crisis, Not What They Had in Mind. My favorite quote from the essay is a variant on Sowell’s:
The lesson is that financial regulation is not like a math problem, where once you solve it the problem stays solved. Instead, a regulatory regime elicits responses from firms in the private sector. As financial institutions adapt to regulations, they seek to maximize returns within the regulatory constraints. This takes the institutions in the direction of constantly seeking to reduce the regulatory “tax” by pushing to amend rules and by coming up with practices that are within the letter of the rules but contrary to their spirit. This natural process of seeking to maximize profits places any regulatory regime under continual assault, so that over time the regime’s ability to prevent crises degrades.
The lesson is that financial regulation is not like a math problem, where once you solve it the problem stays solved. Instead, a regulatory regime elicits responses from firms in the private sector. As financial institutions adapt to regulations, they seek to maximize returns within the regulatory constraints. This takes the institutions in the direction of constantly seeking to reduce the regulatory “tax” by pushing to amend rules and by coming up with practices that are within the letter of the rules but contrary to their spirit. This natural process of seeking to maximize profits places any regulatory regime under continual assault, so that over time the regime’s ability to prevent crises degrades.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Calvin Coolidge
"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan, 'Press on,' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race." —Calvin Coolidge
Sobel's biography
Greenburg's biography
Coolidge and persistence - Jack Barry's great book - Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 and how it changed America
Sobel's biography
Greenburg's biography
Coolidge and persistence - Jack Barry's great book - Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 and how it changed America
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Disincentives from Health Reform
Greg Mankiw writes:
Consider the following question, which is not about healthcare per se: Would you favor a substantial increase in marginal tax rates for millions of middle and upper income Americans to provide more resources for those toward the bottom of the economic ladder?
Your answer to this question cannot be determined by positive economics without adding in some normative judgments. But your answer should strongly influence your view of the health reform bill. The bill moves us closer to much of Western Europe by favoring equality and paying the price of reduced efficiency from much higher marginal tax rates.
Consider the following question, which is not about healthcare per se: Would you favor a substantial increase in marginal tax rates for millions of middle and upper income Americans to provide more resources for those toward the bottom of the economic ladder?
Your answer to this question cannot be determined by positive economics without adding in some normative judgments. But your answer should strongly influence your view of the health reform bill. The bill moves us closer to much of Western Europe by favoring equality and paying the price of reduced efficiency from much higher marginal tax rates.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The health-care debate is part of a larger moral struggle over the free-enterprise system.
Arthur Brooks writes about the current reaction to health care changes
Rather, public resistance stems from the sense that the proposed reforms do violence to three core values of America's free enterprise culture: individual choice, personal accountability, and rewards for ambition.
Rather, public resistance stems from the sense that the proposed reforms do violence to three core values of America's free enterprise culture: individual choice, personal accountability, and rewards for ambition.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
no people, no problem
The recent ASET book club discussion and Boyes posting on the challenge of engaging in civil discourse with statists continues to nag at me.
Jonathan J. Bean's post over on Liberty and Power and the recent posting at Mises confirm the importance of both civil discourse and the continuing frustration that advocates of liberty encounter - both in and out of the academy.
Higher education, as Daniel Klein and others have pointed out, is characterized by a lack of intellectual diversity - the overwhelming majority of those who teach hold statist ideology, what Sowell calls the unconstrained vision.
Bean's comments might lead one to conclude that once the current generation of liberty advocates pass on, that the conversation dies. I am not that pessimistic, I work with a few younger faculty and have encountered younger colleagues at Liberty Fund colloquia who are persuasive advocates of liberty.
That said, the current popular and scholarly debate certainly seems framed in such a manner as to generate loud and abrasive attack rather than civil discourse. I wonder to what extent the economic climate has influenced this climate. I am thinking of Benjamin Friedman's thesis in The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth that tolerance, openness and engagement are cyclical qualities.
Jonathan J. Bean's post over on Liberty and Power and the recent posting at Mises confirm the importance of both civil discourse and the continuing frustration that advocates of liberty encounter - both in and out of the academy.
Higher education, as Daniel Klein and others have pointed out, is characterized by a lack of intellectual diversity - the overwhelming majority of those who teach hold statist ideology, what Sowell calls the unconstrained vision.
Bean's comments might lead one to conclude that once the current generation of liberty advocates pass on, that the conversation dies. I am not that pessimistic, I work with a few younger faculty and have encountered younger colleagues at Liberty Fund colloquia who are persuasive advocates of liberty.
That said, the current popular and scholarly debate certainly seems framed in such a manner as to generate loud and abrasive attack rather than civil discourse. I wonder to what extent the economic climate has influenced this climate. I am thinking of Benjamin Friedman's thesis in The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth that tolerance, openness and engagement are cyclical qualities.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Who Cares About the Constitution?
This from a recent piece in Fox Forum "Opinion".
When I recently asked Congressman James Clyburn, the third ranking Democrat in the House, to tell me “Where in the Constitution the federal government is authorized to regulate everyone’s healthcare”, he replied that most of what Congress does is not authorized by the Constitution, but they do it anyway. There you have it. Congress recognizes no limits on its power. It doesn’t care about the Constitution, it doesn’t care about your inalienable rights, it doesn’t care about the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, it doesn’t even read the laws it writes.
by Andrew Napolitano
- FOXNews.com
- November 06, 2009
Kiss Your Freedoms Goodbye If Health Care Passes
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/11/06/judge-andrew-napolitano-health-care-freedom-congress/
When I recently asked Congressman James Clyburn, the third ranking Democrat in the House, to tell me “Where in the Constitution the federal government is authorized to regulate everyone’s healthcare”, he replied that most of what Congress does is not authorized by the Constitution, but they do it anyway. There you have it. Congress recognizes no limits on its power. It doesn’t care about the Constitution, it doesn’t care about your inalienable rights, it doesn’t care about the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, it doesn’t even read the laws it writes.
by Andrew Napolitano
- FOXNews.com
- November 06, 2009
Kiss Your Freedoms Goodbye If Health Care Passes
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/11/06/judge-andrew-napolitano-health-care-freedom-congress/
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
How the World Got Modern
How the World Got Modern
This post is well worth reading - a sample
To put it another way, there are a series of explanations given for the distinctive features of modernity, each identifying one factor as being the critical one and then going on to claim that this factor either first appeared in Europe or was present there to a greater degree than elsewhere. A non-exhaustive list of such models and the scholars associated with them would include increased capital accumulation (Robert Solow); legal pluralism and a distinctive notion of law (Harold Berman); economic institutions, especially property rights (Douglass North, Nathan Rozenberg); geography (Eric Jones, Jared Diamond); accessible fossil fuels (Kenneth Pomeranz); a different way of thinking about knowledge and technical innovation (Lynn White, Joel Mokyr); greater intellectual openness (Jack Goldstone); a particular kind of consciousness, associated with certain religions (Max Weber, Werner Sombart); divided and constrained political power (Eric Jones, several others); a distinctive family system (Deepak Lal, many demographers); population growth past a critical level (Julian Simon); a higher social status and cultural valuation of trade and enterprise (Deirdre McCloskey); trade and the benefits of specialization (Adam Smith and many others); the role of entrepreneurs (Joseph Schumpeter, William Baumol); some combination of these (David Landes).
This post is well worth reading - a sample
To put it another way, there are a series of explanations given for the distinctive features of modernity, each identifying one factor as being the critical one and then going on to claim that this factor either first appeared in Europe or was present there to a greater degree than elsewhere. A non-exhaustive list of such models and the scholars associated with them would include increased capital accumulation (Robert Solow); legal pluralism and a distinctive notion of law (Harold Berman); economic institutions, especially property rights (Douglass North, Nathan Rozenberg); geography (Eric Jones, Jared Diamond); accessible fossil fuels (Kenneth Pomeranz); a different way of thinking about knowledge and technical innovation (Lynn White, Joel Mokyr); greater intellectual openness (Jack Goldstone); a particular kind of consciousness, associated with certain religions (Max Weber, Werner Sombart); divided and constrained political power (Eric Jones, several others); a distinctive family system (Deepak Lal, many demographers); population growth past a critical level (Julian Simon); a higher social status and cultural valuation of trade and enterprise (Deirdre McCloskey); trade and the benefits of specialization (Adam Smith and many others); the role of entrepreneurs (Joseph Schumpeter, William Baumol); some combination of these (David Landes).
Monday, November 2, 2009
Overpaid Bureaucrats Expand in Number and Pay | CEI
Overpaid Bureaucrats Expand in Number and Pay | CEI
Government employees have radically better benefits and pensions than private sector workers. “When wages and benefits are combined, federal civilian workers averaged $119,982 in 2008, twice the amount of $59,909 which workers in the private sector averaged for wages/benefits. The value of benefits for federal civilian workers averaged $40,000/year, four times the value of benefits that the average private sector employee receives. Only 12% of retirees from the private sector have defined benefit pensions to supplement Social Security. Their average annual pension is $13,083, and they are not eligible for full Social Security benefits until their late 60s. But the majority of public sector workers have pension plans that allow them to retire 10-25 years earlier with benefits many times the retirement payout that Social Security would provide.
Government employees have radically better benefits and pensions than private sector workers. “When wages and benefits are combined, federal civilian workers averaged $119,982 in 2008, twice the amount of $59,909 which workers in the private sector averaged for wages/benefits. The value of benefits for federal civilian workers averaged $40,000/year, four times the value of benefits that the average private sector employee receives. Only 12% of retirees from the private sector have defined benefit pensions to supplement Social Security. Their average annual pension is $13,083, and they are not eligible for full Social Security benefits until their late 60s. But the majority of public sector workers have pension plans that allow them to retire 10-25 years earlier with benefits many times the retirement payout that Social Security would provide.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
The Goal Is Freedom: The Welfare State Corrupts Absolutely What's wrong with healthcare deform.
Over at Freeman, Sheldon Richman makes an important link between the current policy debate over health and liberty. His blog post reflects on the discussion ASET book club recently engaged in over Stealing from Each Other and a posting by Boyes and Pratt on the challenges of civil discourse.
Richman captures the consequence of statist ideology that I have been attempting to articulate and his analysis provides some insight into Boyes' concern and frustration with an seeming inability of statists to engage with empirical or data driven arguments.
Richman writes:
This irresponsible mindset, which is similar to a not very inquisitive child’s, is what at least two generations of government intervention in health care — and the welfare state in general — have produced in the American people. Thus the welfare state retards moral and intellectual development. We expect the State — our surrogate parent — to make it all right. The demagogues we call politicians are happy to feed this attitude because it provides occasions for the expansion and exercise of raw power while seeming, like Santa Claus, to give away free goods. Of such things long political careers are made.
So the Welfare State, in addition motivating stealing acts to retard our moral development. I really think Richman does a fine job of outlining this argument.
Richman captures the consequence of statist ideology that I have been attempting to articulate and his analysis provides some insight into Boyes' concern and frustration with an seeming inability of statists to engage with empirical or data driven arguments.
Richman writes:
This irresponsible mindset, which is similar to a not very inquisitive child’s, is what at least two generations of government intervention in health care — and the welfare state in general — have produced in the American people. Thus the welfare state retards moral and intellectual development. We expect the State — our surrogate parent — to make it all right. The demagogues we call politicians are happy to feed this attitude because it provides occasions for the expansion and exercise of raw power while seeming, like Santa Claus, to give away free goods. Of such things long political careers are made.
So the Welfare State, in addition motivating stealing acts to retard our moral development. I really think Richman does a fine job of outlining this argument.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
