New Post
For a variety of reasons, the modern marketplace no longer promotes and reinforces moral behavior and moral sentiments as effectively as when firms were smaller and markets were local. The danger is that weak, ineffective political responses to such market and moral failures create new market and moral forces that undermine the social fabric that binds us and supports our economic growth and our welfare. Continue »
New Post
Oh boy... Somebody who wishes me ill sends me another piece by New York University Austrian econ--no, that's not right... um... the only word I can use to describe him is "psychopath"... Mario Rizzo: >Why am I tipping the cab driver whom I shall not see again? I tip cabdrivers very small amounts... they really don’t do anything more than drive... they don’t know where things are... there are now all sorts of surcharges... even a tax to support the inefficiently-run mass transit system that I am not taking.... I would really like to not tip.... I often do simply because drivers sometimes say nasty things to you if they don’t get a tip. It is a failing of my psychological make-up to let that bother me. Am I being selfish?... I am not being selfish any more than the driver who wants a tip. The real issue is for me: Is this the best use of my money?... You are not a bad person if you don’t tip taxi drivers much or at all. Just be prepared to tell the voice in your head that it is wrong. And don’t let any possible cab-driver annoyance spoil your day. To... Continue »
New Post
Don’t get Maxine wrong. This is not an argument for central planning. This is an argument for reining in and regulating casino-like behavior and casino-like rewards. In the long run, we will all be dead, but as long as someone will be alive, they deserve a better world and a better life than one gets in an unregulated casino where the odds are disproportionately in favor of the house and the house is an unholy combination of corporate power and wealth backed by government laissez faire and largess. Continue »
New Post
Opinion piece by Alice Shroeder at Bloomberg.com suggests that Goldman Sachs execs are arming themselves in anticipation of the day when the people of Bedford Falls decide to take old man Potter out. That's the problem with really unequal and inequitable wealth distributions: the "haves" have to spend a fortune on security and live behind gates and walls and the "have nots" start their own income transfer program. In this case, the wealth came from "the people." Wouldn't it be easier, pleasanter, and cheaper just to to acknowledge it and help bail out the people who bailed Mr. Potter out?... Continue »