Free Republic 3rd Qtr 2025 Fundraising Target: $81,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $12,988
16%  
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 16%!! Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Keyword: publicchoice

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The Reality of Politics

    01/23/2010 4:44:01 AM PST · by 1rudeboy · 188+ views
    Cafe Hayek ^ | January 22, 2010 | Don Boudreaux
    Lamenting that Democratic politicians up and down Pennsylvania Avenue have lost their enthusiasm for radical health-care ‘reform,’ Paul Krugman today maintains that “politics is supposed to be about achieving something more than your own re-election.”This notion of politics is absurdly unrealistic. Public-choice economics – pioneered by my colleagues Jim Buchanan (who boasts his own Nobel Prize) and Gordon Tullock – uncovers overwhelming evidence that politics, in fact, almost exclusively is about achieving election and re-election. So to insist that politics should be about something other than what it is really about makes as much sense as insisting, say, that snow...
  • The New PC ("public choice" theory)

    07/27/2009 6:02:30 PM PDT · by 1rudeboy · 18 replies · 755+ views
    Forbes ^ | Amity Shlaes
    Acronyms change with the times. For a while "PC" stood for "personal computer." In the 1990s it stood for "political correctness," the uniformity of the progressive doctrine promulgated at colleges and elsewhere. This era brings yet another PC: "public choice" theory. The name is awkward. Who is the public and what is the choice? The theory originated with Nobel Prize-winning economist James M. Buchanan and is actually quite simple. It says that the laws of economics aren't suspended at the door to City Hall. Government reformers view themselves as morally superior, but that is an illusion. They are just like...
  • Why Robbing Peter Won’t Help Poor Paul.

    09/27/2007 7:53:47 AM PDT · by Leisler · 3 replies · 28+ views
    Yale Law Journal ^ | September 16, 2007 | Ilya Somin
    Why Robbing Peter Won’t Help Poor Paul: Low-Income Neighborhoods and Uncompensated Regulatory Takings Does requiring government to pay compensation for regulatory takings harm poor communities? My answer to this underanalyzed question is “probably not.” Because of the relative political weakness of the poor, unfettered government regulatory authority is likely to be used to their detriment more often than to benefit them. History shows that unconstrained government power to abrogate property rights as caused great harm to the poor. Arizona and Oregon have recently enacted referendum initiatives requiring government to compensate landowners for reductions in the value of their property caused...