The Hypocrisy and IRONY run RICH with this one.
This is what he said in his paper about the smoking tax. Good grief, the Nanny State.
(1) smokers that smoked early wished they hadn’t
(2) smokers have a self control problem
okay, but this is his response as what to do.
Given this evidence, policymakers should not be applying the standard economics model [in which people are presumed to act rationally] to smoking policy, which would imply relatively little merit for features such as warning labels. Rather, it is important to consider alternative models that incorporate the type of evidence cited above. For example, my own research shows that if you treat all smokers as standard, rational, patient, forward-looking consumers, then we should probably tax cigarettes at below $1 per pack. But if you incorporate the self-control problems noted above — not even including the failures of teens to anticipate the future — the appropriate tax rises to $5 to $10 per pack.
What standard model is this? The common sense, free-market economics model presumes utilitarianism, not virtue. It's simply trade, fer cryin' out loud. If he can't get the first principles of economics right...