To intervene or not to intervene?

By -
That is the question.

At least it will be the question during my Fall 2013 course, Business, Government and Society. Inspired by the work of Steve Medema, I plan to cover five main reasons for government interventions in the economy. (I have added two to the three that I heard Steve list.) A famous spokesperson for each type of intervention will have their say, followed by a famous spokesperson arguing against the particular intervention, and finally we will look at a contemporary issue demonstrating that the debate is still live. (Here I plan To have students debate each side of the issue, using the arguments previously discussed.) Here, then, are my current ideas for the typology of interventions, the "pro" spokesman, the "anti" spokesperson, and the contemporary issue. (The readings will naturally be relevant excerpts from the entire works listed below, when the work is large.) I seek your advice as to how the below might be improved.

I. The Common Good
Pro: Plato, The Republic
Anti: J.S. Mill, On Liberty
Issue: Pornography

II. Economic Growth
Pro: Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
Anti: F.A. Hayek, "The Use of Knowledge in Society"
Issue: STEM education

III: Externalities
Pro: A.C. Pigou
Anti: Ronald Coase, "The Problem of Social Cost"
Issue: Global Warming

IV. Stability
Pro: Paul Krugman, "Baby-sitting the Economy"
Anti: Mises? Hayek? Lucas?
Issue: The Great Recession

V. Fairness
Pro: John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
Anti: Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State, and Utopia
Issue: Public health care

Comments

  1. Jim5:25 PM

    Is there even such a thing as "an economy" without government intervention? I realize there can be acts of trade outside of the state system. But an actual system of nonviolent exchange? Even dealers in contraband have to plug unto the official - state-enabled - economy to enjoy the full fruit of their trade. Indeed, much of the last 30 years of the drug war has constituted the state trying to make that harder for them to do (e.g. transaction-reporting requirements).

    I know ancaps say such a thing could exist, but it seems like, in any case where the question, "Should [specific government] intervene in this way in this economy?" is meaningful, that economy is already enabled by that very government. So the real question is what kinds of interventions should a particular government make for what ends, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah5:31 PM

      Jim, I am in total agreement with what you say above. But my aim In teaching this course Is to give every viewpoint its due; that means even ancaps!

      Delete
    2. Jim8:54 PM

      I hear you. And I'm not saying don't teach ancaps. ("Some of my best friends...") I'm just uncomfortable that the framing of the course itself concedes too much: by implication, there's a "the economy" exogenous to the state into which the state may or may not insert itself at specific points. As opposed to, there's a "the economy" and a "the state" that are conceptually distinct but intrinsically inseparable, and the question is what kind of weave are we after.

      Delete
  2. John Goes5:39 PM

    Re: Fairness and intervention, I'd personally prefer de Jasay's The State.

    Another more recent book I'd consider is Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind", which discusses fairness as one of many modes of morality which liberalism tends to disproportionately stress.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Machine Learning"

By -
 The name is a misnomer. And a harmful one, because it interferes with understanding the process that is really occuring. What is really occurring is a search of a constrained program space. Let's say you want to be able to identify images of hot dogs . You begin with a plausible program for doing so, that is able to also search the space of nearby programs that might get better results on the problem. You then (in "supervised learning") provide scores that indicate how well one of these possible programs has done on solving the problem. After doing this for some time you settle upon a program that solves the problem "well enough." This is a great technique that can produce truly impressive results on a wide class of problems, such as identifying images of hot dogs. But notice that, except for the phrase in scare quotes, there is no "learning" in the description. Calling this "learning" is importing ideological baggage that just obscures what
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more