1: Mark Stehr, a professor of economics at LeBow, seems to LOVE measuring compliance with incentives under different regulatory regimes. He has papers on the effects of cigarette taxes, seatbelt laws, sunday alcohol sales, bicycle helmet mandates and condom usage. His paper on seat-belts is provided in the post above. Maybe we should read this or another of his articles for an upcoming class and I'll contact him to gauge his interest in coming in for a conversation. Your thoughts?
2: Martha Nussbaum's book, Animal Rights, contains a debate between Judge Posner and Peter Singer, regarding the boundaries of moral existence. Posner argues for a human-centric view of morality, while Singer espouses a utilitarian perspective based upon the ability of creatures to feel pain. Is this something we want to discuss, or is it too far afield? My initial thought is that it may fall way outside the range of our discussion, but I wonder, based on our recent conversations, whether insights gleaned from this sort of argument might affect our consideration of incentives and the reactions groups and individual actors have to them. Again, thoughts?
Hey all. Was wondering if anyone is reading this thing? I'd be interested in thoughts because I can come up with other readings if people are interested.
ReplyDeleteFor example, it might be interesting to discuss the notion of Intergenerational Equity and how it relates to the vision of welfare maximization. In that case I'd suggest reading "In Fairness to Future Generations". It might also be interesting to consider arguments regarding other economic tools such as cost-benefit analysis. There are plenty of resources out there on this. Finally, I would suggest a discussion of political economy. We could read a bit about public choice theory and how it works. I have a reading that I use in environmental law on the topic if you're interested.