,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
One of the worse intellectual failings of economists & other policy analysts is using thin vague references to "market failures" to justify regulation & other govt intervention. Lots more analysis can & should be done before drawing such conclusions.
One should consider 1) the many ways that private sector could respond to problems, if they were legally allowed to do so, 2) the many weaker ways govt could address such problems, & 3) the many plausible govt failure modes & their empirical signatures
It would be possible to elaborate this argument, giving many concrete policy examples. Even to book length. But how many economists & policy experts would buy such a book, or engage it intellectually?
To be clear, most that I could usually show is that the actual intervention policies don't fit well with the most commonly offered rationales, & that plausible govt failures exist there. I couldn't exclude the option that we have good reasons but aren't being honest about them.
