- Cafe Hayek - https://cafehayek.com -

Some Links

Tweet [1]

David Henderson is unhappy with Paul Krugman’s assessment of the respective roles that economists from MIT and the University of Chicago play in high-profile public-policy making [2].

Bob Murphy is unhappy about the same [3].

The late Henry Manne would be pleased with Charley Hooper’s defense of insider trading [4].  A slice:

Insider trading laws are yet another example of government’s desire to capture and exercise political, regulatory and legal power, gain huge monetary awards, and garner favorable PR, all for the sake of prosecuting victimless “crimes” and promoting misplaced notions of fairness. Insider trading should be embraced for its beneficial effects on market efficiency and left as a private matter for those companies interested in preventing it.

Alberto Mingardi discusses one of the unintended consequences of the Spanish government’s ban on Uber in the bulk of Iberia [5].  Here’s Alberto’s spot-on opening:

One thing that regulators, and regulation’s enthusiasts, rarely get is that private businesses will do their best to off-set the impact regulation has on them.

Arnold Kling reviews Ira Katznelson’s Fear Itself. [6]  A slice:

It is hardly uncommon to find intellectuals who believe that decentralized markets are chaotic, capricious, and misanthropic. On occasion, those with such beliefs have disparaged democracy and instead gravitated toward totalitarianism. Those who instead value the right of individual dissent and democratic decision processes tend to believe in a sort of collectivism that somehow emerges from and reflects the popular will. As we will see, Katznelson himself appears to fall within this latter camp.

Prof. Mario Villarreal-Diaz explains, in this short LearnLiberty video, the concept of opportunity cost [7].

Doug Bandow asks: why is there a government postal monopoly? [8]

Norbert Michel rightly decries government’s regulation of financial markets [9].

Comments