![]() |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Well, no. I can agree that what he's calling "free market orthodoxy" (which is actually nothing of the sort) is bogus without embracing his particular solution to the problem. I think in a sense, he's right, though. Taxes can allow a "more efficient provision of (so-called) public goods" if you just adopt the same mindset that the bureaucrat does; something I want is not provided at the level I personally would like in a market allocation, I can apply coercion and force to get the predetermined "correct" number of units produced, therefore, this must be a good thing. The problem (ignoring the moral implications) is that there is no "correct" number - no one person's preference is inherently better than another. [/ QUOTE ] I understand completely that you can oppose “free market orthodoxy” without agreeing with his method of opposing it. He has provided his method of opposition. You have stated that you oppose free market orthodoxy. So I am confused. What exactly is "free market orthodoxy" and what would be your method of opposing it (if any). This is very important PVN as your future Nobel prize is at stake. |
|
|