Law and Economics

From Critiques Of Libertarianism
Jump to: navigation, search

A respectable school of legal and economic analysis which is often abused by libertarian academics for ideological propaganda purposes. It's the obvious omissions of interests besides libertarian values that makes those books bogus.

Links

Coercion and Distribution in a Supposedly Non-Coercive State [More...]
Property systems are coercive. Robert Hale points out in 1923: [T]he systems advocated by professed upholders of laissez-faire are in reality permeated with coercive restrictions of individual freedom and with restrictions, moreover, out of conformity with any formula of "equal opportunity" or of "preserving the equal rights of others." A difficult read.
Libertarians Are Huge Fans of Economic Coercion [More...]
"Hale showed that all economic regimes rely upon economic coercion, laissez-faire ones just as much as socialist ones."
On Piketty's Capital: What Is Wealth? [More...]
"For Piketty, wealth and capital are ultimately socially constructed categories. [...] The pioneer of this legal constructivist account of market valuation was legal realist Robert Hale. [...] Laws do not just affect valuation of assets. Laws are the very core of asset values."
Richard Epstein (6 links)
A law-and-economics, laissez-faire, University of Chicago professor who views the world through the peephole of property rights. Neoliberal propaganda.
The Progressive Assault on Laissez Faire: Robert Hale and the First Law and Economics Movement (book) (1 link)
The first, full-length study of Hale's work, which showed that "private", unregulated economic relations were in fact determined by a state imposed regime of property and contract rights which were hard to square with common-sense notions of social justice.
The Republic of Beliefs: A New Approach to Law and Economics (book)
Argues that the traditional economic analysis of the law has significant flaws and has failed to answer certain critical questions satisfactorily.

Quotations

What’s amusing about libertarians and laissez-faire people (and the loose way certain economists talk) is that they will describe my choice to pay rent as non-coerced and voluntary while describing my choice to pay income taxes as coerced and involuntary. But there is no neutral construction of “coercion” that would ever support such a distinction. As Hale aptly demonstrates, coercion occurs when there are “background constraints on the universe of socially available choices from which an individual might ‘freely’ choose.”
Matt Bruenig, "Libertarians Are Huge Fans of Economic Coercion"