Stephen Davies reviews Geoffrey Hodgson’s The Wealth of a Nation: Institutional Foundations of English Capitalism. A slice from Steve’s review:
Building on his earlier work, especially 2015’s Conceptualising Capitalism, the British economist argues that the Great Enrichment and the associated rise of liberalism stemmed from institutional change, particularly a legal and political system that protects property and contracts and provides a secure space for individual enterprise. He combines that view (which owes much to the Nobel-winning economist Douglass North) with a redefinition of capital and capitalism, where he draws on Joseph Schumpeter, Thorstein Veblen, and other heterodox economists.
Hodgson criticizes the definition of capital used by the great majority of economists and historians, in which the word means physical goods used to produce other goods or services. He argues instead that it properly refers to the purchasing power used to acquire those goods, whether as cash or as credit. This makes finance and financial institutions central to capitalism. It also makes capitalism historically unique: a modern phenomenon that is distinct from the different sorts of markets and property relations that have existed in civilizations throughout history.
Timothy Taylor celebrates ride-sharing and the creativity of markets. Here’s his conclusion:
Many of us now take the widespread availability of ride-sharing for granted. Indeed, many people take the restless innovation and energy of markets for granted in general. Ride-sharing in the real world has its warts and flaws and tradeoffs, as did the previous regime of taxicabs had, as do all real world institutions. But ride-sharing seems to me like an overall dramatic gain in welfare for the million-plus drivers who participate and the many millions of riders. And without the disruptive pressure of market forces, it would not have happened for years, or decades, or perhaps at all.
Michael Strain reflects on the Cato Institute’s new survey of Americans’ attitudes toward trade. Here’s his opening paragraph:
If you listen to the “New Right” (or the progressive Left), you’d think that trade is one of the most important issues facing the nation. Those of us who still believe that voluntary transactions typically make both parties better off — whether between individuals and businesses in the same nation, or in different nations — are scolded for our stubborn refusal to “learn the lessons of the Trump era.”
“SunPower files for bankruptcy, thanks in part to Biden’s tariffs.” A slice:
The cost of panels has also increased amid overall inflation and President Biden’s tariffs, which were backed by domestic manufacturers and Democrats in Congress. Solar installers warned the tariffs would hurt their industry, and they have. Jobs that Mr. Biden’s subsidies giveth, his tariffs and inflation taketh.
GMU Econ alum Paul Mueller exposes the “trillion-dollar surprise in the Inflation Reduction Act.”
Jonathan Turley worries that “a Harris-Walz administration would be a nightmare for free speech.” (HT Todd Zywicki) A slice:
President Biden made censorship a central part of his legacy, even accusing social media companies of “killing people” for failing to increase levels of censorship. Democrats in Congress pushed that agenda by demanding censorship on subjects ranging from climate change to gender identity — even to banking policy — in the name of combatting “disinformation.”
The administration also created offices like the Disinformation Governance Board before it was shut down after public outcry. But it quickly shifted this censorship work to other offices and groups.
As vice president, Harris has long supported these anti-free speech policies. The addition of Walz completes a perfect nightmare for free speech advocates. Walz has shown not only a shocking disregard for free speech values but an equally shocking lack of understanding of the First Amendment.
Arnold Kling continues to write insightfully about politics in today’s America.
