Utopia, you are standing in it!

Robert Skidelsky, biography of John Maynard Keynes writes this nice article.

He says biggest advantage Hayek enjoyed was he outlived Keynes by nearly 50 years. This allowed Hayek to spread his influence and Keynes to lose out his.

Today is a day of this versus this on ME blog. After Schumpeter vs Kirzner, here is another take on the more famous Hayek vs Keynes.

This one is by Norges Bank  Deputy Governor Jon Nicolaisen. As he is a central banker, what more to expect than whether one should intervene ot let markets work during a crisis:

Interesting post by Prof Steven Horowitz.

He says we usually think entrepreneurs to do big heroic things which is what Schumpeter also said. However, entrepreneurship could be incremental as well a la Kirzner:

Over at Cafe Hayek, Don Boudreaux writes about a common slur we free-market supporters get called: shills for Big Business.  Don does an excellent job discussing how ridiculous such mudslinging is, so I’d like to discuss a tangentially related point: motive.

On top of being called shills, we’re often told we either don’t care about the poor (or, worse, are actively trying to oppress or hinder the poor) by opposing various “Progressive” welfare actions such as minimum wage, protectionist trade tariffs, or immigration restriction and the like.

The reality, however, is quite different.  We oppose these schemes because we, like many other economists including those on the Left, believe they to be counter to the poor’s well-being.  Our arguments are not that we hate the poor, that they just should be happy with their lot in life, or any other strawmen our accusers like to erect, but because we…

Thanks to the always great James Crabtree (@jamescrabtree), I learned two awesome facts about Singapore this morning.

First, they have children’s books about “famous urban planners.”  I’m not sure which is funnier, the fact that there are famous urban planners or that there are children’s books extolling their virtues.  I guess this is handy for nights when your kids can’t fall asleep. Here’s a photo of one of them and a link to where you can buy it (and even read a sample):

Here’s the synopsis that’s given at the publisher’s link:

“How does a spoilt young boy and party-going dandy become the man who housed a nation? Discover the passion that drives Lim Kim San from his comfortable, carefree life into a mission that would change Singapore forever.”

This seems like the worst superhero story ever. Maybe Zac Snyder can direct it.

Second, if your kids reads the book…

Ajay Shah has a post on the topic. The summary is:

Many times in India, subsidies are being used to express sheer value judgments; they are just the faddish thinking of one bunch of hausfraus running policy versus another. At other times, a market failure is indeed present. But instead of more subtle interventions and the minimum use of force — based on a sound scientific understanding of the anatomy of the market failure — we tend to rush to the excessive use of force that is a subsidy. Every subsidy is grounded in the monopoly of violence of the State that is required for tax collection. We should be far more circumspect before doling out subsidies. Subsidies are the last refuge of a failed policy maker.

One may disagree with what the author has to say but points have been well argued.

I guess the problem is not…

In the seemingly-endless housing supply debate, there is often a divide between those favouring greater intensification, and those favouring a larger physical footprint for growing cities.  My own policy view is squarely in the “it should be a matter of individual choice, provided the infrastructure etc costs of development are appropriately internalized, and the rights of existing property owners are protected” camp (and yes, I recognize that the definition of almost every word in that statement could be extensively debated). My practical prediction is that New Zealand is a society where most people will prefer to have a decent backyard (they don’t flock to high rise apartment buildings or town houses with tiny sections in Hastings or Timaru), so long as regulatory restrictions don’t make that infeasible.  It was quite possible 50 years ago, when New Zealand incomes were much lower.  There is simply no reason, in a country with this much land…