Prof. Bainbridge has announced that it is time to shift from a general interest, punditry-style blog to a more narrow focus on issues of business law and economics…

Read the full piece here. 

Those of us who defend the right to outsource are frequently criticized for lacking compassion and for being concerned only with the bottom line. I’ll admit that profitability concerns generally motivate decisions to outsource (and most other business decisions), but I won’t concede that outsourcing imposes a net harm on the economically disadvantaged. If we’re really concerned with alleviating the worst instances of poverty and are not focused only on protecting our own kind, we should support the right to outsource.

Read the full piece here. 

Hanno Kaiser at Antitrust Review discusses the implications of Google’s acquisition of YouTube for the net neutrality debate. Hanno opines that the deal may increase the likelihood of a neutrality result even without legislation. While Google’s public pro-neutrality stance is well known, GMU’s Tom Hazlett (my office neighbor and fellow UCLA Economics alum) has a great column in the Financial Times highlighting the difference between Google’s “public policy” stance on net neutrality and its business model. Here’s Hazlett on Google’s now well-known position on net neutrality legislation…

Read the full piece here. 

Classical liberals have long derided their conservative cousins for being fairweather friends of small government, but the criticism has been fairly limited. In general, conservatives have embraced limited government on matters of economic regulation and have endorsed governmental meddling only on matters involving so-called “values” issues like broadcast decency and homosexuality. Lately, though, conservatives seem ever more willing to embrace big government on matters that seem more economic than values-oriented.

Read the full piece here. 

With the Econ Nobel (or for those who feel better using the official label, the “Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel” … ) to be announced on Monday, the time is ripe for speculation. Greg Mankiw, Don Boudreaux, the WSJ, and Tyler Cowen have chimed in on the frontrunners. Cowen predicts Eugene Fama and Richard Thaler for empirical finance while registering his own vote in favor of GMU’s Gordon Tullock (seconded by Boudreaux).

Read the full piece here.

A few months ago, Keith posted regarding the announcement of Vanderbilt’s new PhD program in Law and Economics. The post generated a lively discussion in the comments (and a follow up post here on GMU’s own Law and Econ program). Much of the discussion focused on the following questions: what would such a program should look like? What classes would be taught? And by whom? Well, Vandy has answers! The new (to me at least) website contains a program announcement, information on curriculum design, and a roster of what looks like a truly top notch faculty (which is apparently looking to expand).

Read the full piece here. 

The topic of specialization in law school faculties has come up again in the blogosphere, as tends to be the case around hiring season. Mark Fenster starts us off at Prawfs with a very thoughtful post noting some of the potential costs associated with specialization and concludes…

Read the full piece here. 

WSJ Law Blog offers a follow up (and the complaint!) to Keith’s post (also check out the discussion in the comments) on the antitrust suit filed by an independent coffee shop owner against Starbucks concerning the use of exclusive leases with landowners. After reviewing the complaint, I agree with Lauren Albert, the antitrust lawyer quoted in Lattman’s story who concludes that: “The facts here don’t really seem to allege a violation of antitrust law.” Indeed, they do not.

Read the full piece here.

The AEI and Brookings have released a volume entitled “Antitrust Policy and Vertical Restraints.”  You can check out the contents here, and it is available for purchase here.

Read the full piece here.