13 thoughts on “Don’t Underestimate The Invisible Hand!!”
A first-rate piece! Baked into many of the recently implemented mask edicts is the false assumption that the market will not correct those business proprietors who choose to deviate from or ignore COVID health guidelines. The market has clearly created an incentive for businesses to maintain sanitary conditions in their stores, however this fact has been profoundly neglected by media pundits and politicians who seem to favor coercive measures over self-governance and freedom.
Absolutely! Too few people recognize that the self-correcting nature of the market can provide a more efficient solution.
Unfortunately, due to state and local governments getting involved in the matter, it has become a politicized issue. It should be a matter of personal choice. The implied reciprocity of that right also enables homeowners and store owners to require visitors or patrons to wear masks. However, this also allows them to not require them to wear masks.
The right to do engage in behavior also secures the right to abstain from it. A principle that many atheists need to acknowledge. The right of free-worship also implies the ability to abstain from religious practices (Just using this one as an example).
1.) Thank you for your kind word regarding my essay. I hope to publish more in the near future. I just need the right inspiration for another brief and punchy article.
2.) I just finished reading the abstract. Very interesting. Sounds like polycentricity at it’s finest. I will read the full article in the near future and incorporate it in my water-rights research.
I was taking a bit of a hiatus as try to regroup and thoroughly flesh out the issue.
That was a really good paper. It varies the role of trade relations in avoiding conflict.
Oddly enough the authors’ point regarding the distribution of costs of violent conflict could also be used for privatizing defense.
The Acadians settlers did not receive much (or any)support from the mother country. Making it much more costly to engage in armed conflicts. Making me wonder if the production of defense, security, and surveillance services was not provided by the state if there would be less instances of wars.
Military action funded by tax dollars creates the illusion of “free” defense services. If the costs were concentrated in monthly defense premiums or quarterly invoices, I believe we all be much more cautious about engaging in armed conflicts.
If my understanding of that concept is correct I don’t see why not. Even we are talking about contributing resources or money to a defense club, association, neighborhood militia, the HOA armed auxiliary force ( a value-add service provide through HOA dues), etc. I would surmise the moment your contribution to such services is salient your incentive structure has changed,
If it is barrier the mass composite of taxes collected. An individual is more apt to believe such services are free.
A first-rate piece! Baked into many of the recently implemented mask edicts is the false assumption that the market will not correct those business proprietors who choose to deviate from or ignore COVID health guidelines. The market has clearly created an incentive for businesses to maintain sanitary conditions in their stores, however this fact has been profoundly neglected by media pundits and politicians who seem to favor coercive measures over self-governance and freedom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely! Too few people recognize that the self-correcting nature of the market can provide a more efficient solution.
Unfortunately, due to state and local governments getting involved in the matter, it has become a politicized issue. It should be a matter of personal choice. The implied reciprocity of that right also enables homeowners and store owners to require visitors or patrons to wear masks. However, this also allows them to not require them to wear masks.
The right to do engage in behavior also secures the right to abstain from it. A principle that many atheists need to acknowledge. The right of free-worship also implies the ability to abstain from religious practices (Just using this one as an example).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well done! Like Coase taught us, “legal failure” or government failure is just as bad (if not worse!) than “market failure.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you sir. Yes, this is very true. Coase was a wealth of wisdom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am glad to finally get it published. It is the first time I have gotten any of my writing published at the national level.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That is a huge deal, and excellent essay to boot!
LikeLiked by 1 person
PS: On a related note, have you seen this: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/12/could-north-america-have-been-settled-more-peacefully-with-fewer-property-rights-violations-against-native-americans.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
1.) Thank you for your kind word regarding my essay. I hope to publish more in the near future. I just need the right inspiration for another brief and punchy article.
2.) I just finished reading the abstract. Very interesting. Sounds like polycentricity at it’s finest. I will read the full article in the near future and incorporate it in my water-rights research.
I was taking a bit of a hiatus as try to regroup and thoroughly flesh out the issue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That was a really good paper. It varies the role of trade relations in avoiding conflict.
Oddly enough the authors’ point regarding the distribution of costs of violent conflict could also be used for privatizing defense.
The Acadians settlers did not receive much (or any)support from the mother country. Making it much more costly to engage in armed conflicts. Making me wonder if the production of defense, security, and surveillance services was not provided by the state if there would be less instances of wars.
Military action funded by tax dollars creates the illusion of “free” defense services. If the costs were concentrated in monthly defense premiums or quarterly invoices, I believe we all be much more cautious about engaging in armed conflicts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder to what extent this excellent critique of defense expenditures could also apply to Nozick’s “mutual protection groups.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
If my understanding of that concept is correct I don’t see why not. Even we are talking about contributing resources or money to a defense club, association, neighborhood militia, the HOA armed auxiliary force ( a value-add service provide through HOA dues), etc. I would surmise the moment your contribution to such services is salient your incentive structure has changed,
If it is barrier the mass composite of taxes collected. An individual is more apt to believe such services are free.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly right!
LikeLiked by 1 person