Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 9 of 474 Results in Economics
TOTM Over the past few weeks I’ve read at least two dozen papers, mostly by legal scholars (but some by economists) employing or critiquing economic analysis . . .
Over the past few weeks I’ve read at least two dozen papers, mostly by legal scholars (but some by economists) employing or critiquing economic analysis of law, that use the term “Chicago School,” in a critical and misleading way. Conventionally, use of this nomenclature comes along with a claim that “Chicago School” economics is code for a particular form of non-interventionist, politically conservative philosophy based upon only an unjustified “faith” in markets.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM In my last post I claimed that there is a no “free market economics orthodoxy” amongst antitrust economists or those working in the field of . . .
In my last post I claimed that there is a no “free market economics orthodoxy” amongst antitrust economists or those working in the field of law and economics. In response to the post, an anonymous TOTM reader emails the following related, and probably more interesting, questions: “is there a free market orthodoxy amongst (1) legal commentators and (2) the Supreme Court?”
TOTM Thom’s excellent post covers most of the important points in Leegin and offers a fairly comprehensive critique of what I deemed to be a surprisingly . . .
Thom’s excellent post covers most of the important points in Leegin and offers a fairly comprehensive critique of what I deemed to be a surprisingly weak dissent from Justice Breyer. As we’ve noted over and over here at TOTM, the death of Dr. Miles is clearly the right outcome judged based upon the underlying antitrust fundamentals. As Thom and I have pointed out in various posts on RPM here at TOTM, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that anticompetitive RPM is much talked about but rarely observed or documented. Given that the bulk of the contemporary evidence on RPM suggests that it is largely pro-competitive, I must admit that I was surprised by Tyler Cowen’s “casual guess” in a post at the VC that >50% of RPM are associated with attempts to collude.
TOTM There’s been enough attention paid to the question of whether Steve Levitt is ruining economics. I did my share to contribute to the focus on . . .
There’s been enough attention paid to the question of whether Steve Levitt is ruining economics. I did my share to contribute to the focus on this question. My bad. But now even Levitt himself has responded to Scheiber’s claim that he is ruining economics. His response: “No I haven’t, and you wouldn’t know it if I had because you don’t know any economics.” Ok, that is paraphrasing but I think captures the spirit of the response.
TOTM Peter Klein‘s post over at the always excellent Organizations and Markets reminded me that I have been wanting to blog about the most recent exchange . . .
Peter Klein‘s post over at the always excellent Organizations and Markets reminded me that I have been wanting to blog about the most recent exchange between Ben Klein and Ronald Coase over the asset specificity, vertical integration, and the famous Fisher Body – General Motors example which has become a classic example of hold up in the literature. While this example from the original Klein, Crawford, and Alchian (1978) piece is almost 30 years old, and has been the subject of literally thousands of pages of debate and an entire JLE issue (April 2000), there is still some disagreement over the facts and what they tell us about the relationship between asset specificity and vertical integration.
Popular Media Ben Klein’s new paper, “The Economic Lessons of Fisher Body – General Motors,” appears in the February 2007 issue of the International Journal of the Economics of Business. He . . .
Ben Klein’s new paper, “The Economic Lessons of Fisher Body – General Motors,” appears in the February 2007 issue of the International Journal of the Economics of Business. He is not about to give Ronald Coase the last word. Indeed, Klein writes, the newest evidence on the history of the relationship between Fisher and GM confirms his earlier claim that GM’s acquisition of Fisher in 1926 was a response to opportunistic behavior by Fisher. This evidence…
TOTM Representative Kucinich has announced that the House Oversight and Government Reform Domestic Policy Subcommittee will be launching an investigation into “a variety of marketplace issues . . .
Representative Kucinich has announced that the House Oversight and Government Reform Domestic Policy Subcommittee will be launching an investigation into “a variety of marketplace issues including monopolies in the grocery industry.” HT: AntitrustProf Blog. Hearings are apparently tentatively scheduled for mid-month. What is the committee looking for? Just about anything.
TOTM Libertarian paternalism, behavioral law and economics, and “soft” paternalism are topics of discussion here on TOTM from time to time (see, e.g. here, here, and . . .
Libertarian paternalism, behavioral law and economics, and “soft” paternalism are topics of discussion here on TOTM from time to time (see, e.g. here, here, and here). Two very good economists who think about these problems quite a bit, Mario Rizzo (NYU) and Glen Whitman (Agoraphilia, CSUN), have posted their paper “Paternalist Slopes.”
TOTM The FTC announced this week perhaps its best decision since . . . well, ever. Read the full piece here.
The FTC announced this week perhaps its best decision since . . . well, ever.
