Here is an example of a libgressive policy recommendation that aims at securing heaven on earth with no regard for the constraints of the market, the rational behavior of sub-state actors, and individual freedom:
We need a food equity law in this country, forcing large grocery chains to open stores in low-income areas. As part of this law, we need food regulators checking the produce and comparing it store to store, with large fines if stores in rich areas have significantly better access to fresh food and significantly better quality and freshness of the fruits and vegetables.
Healthy food is a right and should not be solely left to the profit motive.
Note what Prof. Loomis wants the state to do to corporations with its coercive power – not nudging, but stomping them until they do what he wants them to do, and then stomping them some more if the leafy greens aren’t the color of the grass at Fenway Park. So much for freedom!
What is especially sad is that Prof. Loomis doesn’t seem to appreciate that the state itself (via zoning and other regulations) is frequently responsible for keeping large box grocery stores out of low-income neighborhoods. And rather than Prof. Munger’s large corporate overlords working to entrench their power and profits against the public interest, it is often a baptist and bootlegger coalition of neighborhood activists and small (rent-seeking) businesses that stop the Wal-Marts of the world from doing what Loomis desires. I don’t deny the capture model of politics – but it isn’t always the large corporations that win. A bit too much Marx within Munger’s model, perhaps? Very old school (and pre-Stiglerian?).