Suchergebnisse

In 1962, economists James M. Buchanan and Gordon Tullock published The Calculus of Consent, in which they developed the principles of public choice theory. In the fifty years since its publication, the book has defined the field and set the standard for research and analysis. To celebrate a half-century of scholarship in public choice, Dwight Lee has assembled distinguished academics from around the world to reflect on the influence of this monumental publication, and, more broadly, the legacy of its legendary authors. Their essays cover a broad spectrum of topics and approaches, from the impact of public choice theory on foreign policy analysis to personal remembrances of learning from and collaborating with Buchanan and Tullock. The result is a unique collection of insights that celebrate public choice and its visionary proponents, while considering its future directions.

Few examples exist of greater disagreement between the public and economists than the one over laws outlawing 'price gouging.' The general public's view is clearly reflected in the almost complete lack of political support for allowing prices to be determined by market forces after a natural disaster. This paper begins by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the instinctive small-group morality and how markets have reduced some of the disadvantages by expanding the number of people with whom one can productively interact. The next section explains why natural disaster victims cannot get all the help they need unless the help motivated by the instinctive morality is supplemented and enhanced with the information and motivation provided by unrestricted market prices as well as why, despite this enhancement, people still fail to appreciate the benefits those prices provide. The author addresses the concern that the poor are harmed by 'price gouging.'. Adapted from the source document.

Most supporters of the minimum wage see it as a moral issue. Even when they follow arguments based on the logic of supply-and-demand analysis and unintended consequences, they remain convinced that having a minimum wage and increasing it occasionally is the moral thing to do. The purpose of this paper is to put forth a convincing moral case against the minimum wage. Accomplishing this purpose is more difficult than pointing out that the minimum wage results in outcomes counter to those supporters consider moral, although doing the latter is also important. Making a convincing moral case against the minimum-wage legislation requires that you consider two moralities, the first of which explains the political popularity of the legislation and the second of which explains why it harms low-wage workers, in particular those most in need of help. Adapted from the source document.

Making a convincing moral case for markets is difficult. The approach most often taken is to point to the desirable outcomes motivated by markets, many of which can be described as moral. Markets are unequaled in reducing poverty, improving environmental quality, decreasing discrimination, and providing opportunities for social and economic advance based on freedom and responsibility. These and other desirable market outcomes result from a spontaneous process of widespread social cooperation that few understand. Thus, the benefits that markets generate are easily taken for granted, with little appreciation being shown for the markets' role in providing them. Even when market outcomes are appreciated, they are morally tainted in the minds of many because they are seen to result from motives that are morally dubious, if not outright immoral. Stereotypical market behavior fails to satisfy the conditions that people associate emotionally with morality. Adapted from the source document.

This article addresses the ban on drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Environmentalists argue that drilling for oil in the region would pose a risk to the wildlife; the author argues that the risks are exaggerated &, if care is taken, the wildlife should not be harmed. Since the Audubon Sociey allows oil companies to drill for oil in a nature preserve the society owns, which results in money to put toward further protection of wildlife, the author asserts that the society should decide whether drilling should be allowed in ANWR. The Audubon Society is able to see the benefits in drilling for oil on their own land, so they should apply the same cost-&-benefits analysis to the ANWR issue. 8 References. A. Lee