Gil Skillman writes: >> Talk about jumping to harsh conclusions with no inclination to understand >> what the underlying argument is supposed to reflect. Most mainstream >> economists I know treat the scenario of "perfect markets" only as a >> reference case. In percentage terms, most mainstream research is on >> various departures from perfect market conditions.
Then why do the people on this list spend so much time criticizing N/C methodological assumptions if it is all much ado about nothing? >> And a quick review of EconLit shows that mainstream economics explored >> these possibilities (in particular, warranties) with care, and probably >> before "Masonomics" ever got around to reading the Akerlof article on >> lemons. Nor was Akerlof blind to such possibilities, but he would >> probably be less unconditionally committed to the idea that there must be >> a suitable entrepreneurial solution in every case of information-based >> market failure. For example, one doesn't see entrepreneurs providing much >> in the way of unemployment insurance or employee insurance against >> employer bankruptcy. Market displacement by government insurance? It is relatively easy to find a new job in a market economy, so not worth the premium to the employee? Just guessing. >> Not "logically lead" in a strictly deductive sense, perhaps, but maybe in >> an inductive sense. Let's begin with two scenarios, national defense and >> and a justice system. What's the argument and evidence in favor of market >> solutions in these cases? I am not an anarchist. I believe in a territorial monopoly of force. However, I am glad we have more than one monopoly to choose from. They are called "nation-states," which have to compete for citizens, so the existence of such competition produces better defense and justice systems than would exist if there was one single international force. Furthermore, with respect to justice, there is real competition in the US market. Businesses can choose under what state legal regime they will operate. Corporations can choose where to incorporate. Contracting parties can choose what law will govern the contract. Parties can agree to arbitration or mediation. Such competition produces a better justice system than a national monopoly. David Shemano _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
