At e3ne.org, I have posted some reflections on my last discussion with the Ethics & Economics Challenge students, on the topic of private property rights. The work of Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson on how property rights support high levels of development plays a prominent role. Here's a scatter plot from their famous 2001 paper: Economies … Continue reading Property Rights: Necessary but Not Sufficient for Prosperity
There seems to be very little disagreement among market-oriented economists that the optimal number of people on the planet is much larger than the number of people currently alive (see here, here, and here for examples). Here are some reasons for skepticism about that claim. The main advantage of more people is a deepening of … Continue reading Against Natalism
Donald Shoup of UCLA: “Minimum parking requirements act like a fertility drug for cars.” HT: MR citing NYT.
A Town of Tonawanda building inspector wants to destroy my native plant garden through misapplication of town weed laws. But my garden is legal, and I can prove it...
Environmentalists are coming around to the idea of nuclear power. This is good news - though we should be just as critical of any rent-seeking by the nuclear power industry as we would of other "green" technology companies and their allies in the government.
So let's take some examples of things one could do for the benefit of the environment: eating less meat; polluting less by, e.g., driving less; propagating native species and destroying invasive species; reducing, reusing, and recycling; not littering; not spraying pesticides. Assume for the sake of argument that we will all benefit if everyone did these things. Do we then have a duty to do them? Would it be wrong not to do them?