Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 9 of 663 Results in FTC
TOTM Few academic publications have had as much direct public influence on the law as the 2008 article by my NYU colleague Oren Bar-Gill and then . . .
Few academic publications have had as much direct public influence on the law as the 2008 article by my NYU colleague Oren Bar-Gill and then Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren. In “Making Credit Safer,” they seek to combine two strands of academic thought in support of one great cause—more regulation of financial markets. They start with the central claim of behavioral economics that sophisticated entrepreneurs are able to take advantage of the systematic foibles of ordinary people, by rigging their products in ways that work systematically to their own advantage. By plying ordinary individuals will carefully packaged payment contracts, firms can undercut the central postulate of rational choice economics that all voluntary transactions produce mutual gains for the parties. In its stead we get the wreckage of families and fortunes brought about by unscrupulous bankers in search of a buck. Warren and Bar-Gill repeatedly talk about the importance of empirical evidence. Her own work, however, is exceptionally shoddy, as Todd Zywicki has recently pointed out in the Wall Street Journal.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM Behavioral law and economics has arisen to international prominence; between Cass Sunstein’s appointment to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs the United Kingdom’s . . .
Behavioral law and economics has arisen to international prominence; between Cass Sunstein’s appointment to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs the United Kingdom’s appointment of a “nudge” bureau, behavioralism has enjoyed a meteoric impact on policymakers. Thus far, behavioral economists have almost exclusively focused on the myriad foibles or purported cognitive errors which hamper consumer decision-making. These traits include “optimism bias,” the tendency for an individual to underestimate the likelihood of negative results from their behavior, and hyperbolic discounting, where individuals reveal time-inconsistent preferences (often by over-valuing immediate consumption, at least as measured against some third party’s valuation).
TOTM What do the midterm election results mean for antitrust, if anything? According to the American Antitrust Institute, not much… Read the full piece here.
What do the midterm election results mean for antitrust, if anything? According to the American Antitrust Institute, not much…
TOTM The FTC settlement with Intel has been finalized with one change the Commission’s press release describes as follows… Read the full piece here.
The FTC settlement with Intel has been finalized with one change the Commission’s press release describes as follows…
TOTM In a policy speech earlier this year, Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch of the Federal Trade Commission advocating the incorporation of behavioral economics into antitrust analysis . . .
In a policy speech earlier this year, Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch of the Federal Trade Commission advocating the incorporation of behavioral economics into antitrust analysis suggested one concern that others might have with the approach was that “behavioral economics was simply liberalism masquerading as economic thinking.” The Commissioner himself has been a vocal proponent of incorporating insights from behavioral economics into antitrust, as has already been done in the consumer protection realm (see, e.g. CFPB). Indeed, with Cass Sunstein’s appointment at OIRA, the recent creation of a “Nudge” team in David Cameron’s Cabinet (aka “behavioral insight team”) in the UK, the CFPB, and the calls from at least one Federal Trade Commissioner to modify antitrust analysis suggest the behavioral regulatory regime is no longer right around the corner; it has arrived.
TOTM We dole out at least our fair share of criticism for the Federal Trade Commission here. Now its time for some credit where its due. . . .
We dole out at least our fair share of criticism for the Federal Trade Commission here. Now its time for some credit where its due. Historically, one of the consistent highlights of the Commission’s output has been its competition policy advocacy work. In this case, the FTC (or at least the Bureau of Competition, Bureau of Economics, and the Office of Policy and Planning) provided comments on New Jersey Senate Bill 484.
TOTM There are some new developments in the Federal Trade Commission’s consummated merger case brought against Ovation. Namely, the FTC has lost. TOTM readers may recall . . .
There are some new developments in the Federal Trade Commission’s consummated merger case brought against Ovation. Namely, the FTC has lost. TOTM readers may recall that I spent some time criticizing the Federal Trade Commission’s complaint, back in 2008, in FTC v. Ovation in federal district court in Minnesota. As I described the stylized facts back then…
TOTM Economist and occasional TOTM guest blogger Steve Salop (Georgetown) recently sent me the following questions spurred by the local debate over Governor McConnell’s proposal to . . .
Economist and occasional TOTM guest blogger Steve Salop (Georgetown) recently sent me the following questions spurred by the local debate over Governor McConnell’s proposal to private the retailing of alcoholic beverages…
TOTM Intel Chairman and CEO Paul Otellini recently gave the keynote address at the Technology Policy Institute’s Aspen Forum on the US regulation environment and its . . .
Intel Chairman and CEO Paul Otellini recently gave the keynote address at the Technology Policy Institute’s Aspen Forum on the US regulation environment and its effect of innovation and economic growth (HT: CNET, WSJ). The speech got some play in the media because of its overall depressing tone for the US, and its frank criticism of the current state of US regulatory affairs.
