Podcasts about Coase theorem

Show host Gene Tunny responds to listener feedback about the private versus public sector's role in wealth creation, particularly addressing externalities like environmental harm and whether governments should fund facilities like Men's Sheds. He also explores the efficiency of the private sector compared to government spending.If you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for Gene, please email him at contact@economicsexplored.com  or send a voice message via https://www.speakpipe.com/economicsexplored. Timestamps for EP254Introduction (0:00)Externalities and Market Efficiency (4:47)Government's Role in Addressing Externalities (11:30)Coase Theorem and Market Failures (19:43)Government Spending and Efficiency (26:31)Men's Sheds and Government Support (32:51)Scott Prasser's Critique of Government Spending (39:43)Balancing Government and Private Sector Roles (45:49)TakeawaysExternalities in Wealth Creation: Private markets can overlook externalities such as pollution or public health impacts, justifying government intervention in some cases.Incentives for Efficiency: Due to market competition, the private sector generally has stronger incentives for efficiency, while government projects typically lack the same discipline.Government Spending Criticism: Many government projects, particularly those done for political reasons, are inefficient and do not consistently deliver expected benefits.Cost-Benefit Analysis is Crucial: Government spending should be evaluated through cost-benefit analysis to avoid wasting public funds.Coase Theorem and Market Solutions: While private negotiation can theoretically resolve externalities (as per the Coase Theorem), it typically does not work in practice due to high transaction costs and imperfect information.Links relevant to the conversationRelevant previous episodes:Government vs Private Sector in Wealth Creation:https://economicsexplored.com/2024/07/05/government-vs-private-sector-who-generates-wealth-ep247/White Elephant Stampede:https://economicsexplored.com/2022/10/17/white-elephant-stampede-w-scott-prasser-ep161/Coase theorem paper - “Does the Coase theorem hold in real markets? An application to the negotiations between waterworks and farmers in Denmark”https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479711003331Urbis review of Men's Sheds:https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022/01/review-of-support-for-the-men-s-shed-movement-current-state-report_0.pdfBeyond Blue Report on Men's Sheds:https://mensshed.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Ultrafeed-beyondblue-Mens-Shed-in-Australia-Final-Executive-Report-2013.pdfLumo Coffee promotion10% of Lumo Coffee's Seriously Healthy Organic Coffee.Website: https://www.lumocoffee.com/10EXPLOREDPromo code: 10EXPLORED 

How do you trade off your own interests against the interests of others? And what role do transaction costs play? A discussion of our "interest" in the welfare of others,  and the complexity that adds to economic indifference curves. Things take an interesting turn, going toward how transaction costs can shape our institutions and preferences, ranging from  a marine fishery to a bowl of M&M's. And TWEJ. Always, TWEJ.Some Resources:Gary Lynne, on Dual Interest Theory:   https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/02601079231172366?journalCode=jieaNeo(Classical) and Rama-Kandra, on caring about others:  https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0242653/characters/nm0924502On Coase, Olson, and the Problem of Encompassing Institutions:Justice Department Merger Guidelines:  https://www.justice.gov/archives/atr/merger-guidelines-and-integration-efficiencies-antitrust-review-horizontal-mergers: https://www.justice.gov/archives/atr/merger-guidelines-and-integration-efficiencies-antitrust-review-horizontal-mergersRonald Coase, 1937, "The Theory of the Firm." https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.xRichard Jankowski on Encompassing Organizations:  (1989). Preference Aggregation in Firms and Corporatist Organizations: The Enterprise Group as a Cellular Encompassing Organization. American Journal of Political Science, 33(4), 973–996. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2111117Robert Keohane, "International Institutions": https://www.jstor.org/stable/2600589Mancur Olson, the Rise and Decline of Nations. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1nprddThe "Coase Theorem" and the "$100 Bill on the Sidewalk" Joke: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3405632On Brown M&Ms:The DLR interview (excerpts): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IxqdAgNJckNPR on Brown M&Ms:  https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2012/02/14/146880432/the-truth-about-van-halen-and-those-brown-m-msBackground, including a copy of the relevant part of the contract:  https://www.insider.com/van-halen-brown-m-ms-contract-2016-9If you have questions or comments, or want to suggest a future topic, email the show at taitc.email@gmail.com ! You can follow Mike Munger on Twitter at @mungowitz

In our first installment of the two-part FCC series we discussed the origins of the Federal Communications Commission, the reason it came into existence and the tension between its charge and the First Amendment. Our story resumes with a nod to the Chicago School, the one-two punch of the Reagan and Clinton administrations to deliver a death blow to media competition in the United States and the recent history of net neutrality. Let's fucking go.  Chapters Intro: 00:01:56 Chapter One: The Coase Theorem. 00:03:08 Chapter Two: Reagan and Clinton. 00:10:28 Chapter Three: Title II and Net Neutrality. 00:25:25 Chapter Four: Bring it home, Max. 00:37:22 Post Show Musings: 00:42:14 Book Love: 00:53:17 Outro: 00:54:02 Resources FCC Website Steven G. Medema: “Failure to Appear”: The Use of the Coase Theorem in Judicial Opinion European Council On Foreign Relations: Network effects: Europe's digital sovereignty in the Mediterranean Brookings: Was the 1996 Telecommunications Act successful in promoting competition? USTelecom: Research FCC: National Broadband Map Community Networks: Community Network Map Berkman Klein Center: Community-Owned Fiber Networks: Value Leaders in America Vice: A Community-Run ISP Is the Highest Rated Broadband Company in America Tristin Esfandiari: The FCC Threatens Free Speech Open Secrets: Ajit Pai Employment History FCC: FCC Releases Restoring Internet Freedom Order FCC: Biography of Former Chairman Ajit Pai Public Knowledge: We Already Knew Broadband Should Be A Public Utility. The Pandemic Made It Obvious. Congress.gov: S.4676 - Net Neutrality and Broadband Justice Act of 2022 Electronic Frontier Foundation: New Proposal Brings Us a Step Closer to Net Neutrality Ed Markey: Communications Act Bill Electronic Frontier Foundation: Today's Net Neutrality Order is a Win, with a Few Blemishes Electronic Frontier Foundation: Today—and Every Day—We Fight to Defend the Open Internet Searchlight Capital: Investments Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University: 2 Live Crew Book Love Steven J. Simmons: The Fairness Doctrine and the Media Brian J. Karem: Free the Press: The Death of American Journalism and How to Revive It Ken Auletta: Backstory: Inside the Business of News Bernard Harcourt: The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order -- If you like #UNFTR, please leave us a rating and review on Apple Podcasts: unftr.com/rate and follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram at @UNFTRpod. Visit us online at unftr.com. Join the Unf*cker-run Facebook group: facebook.com/groups/2051537518349565 Buy yourself some Unf*cking Coffee at shop.unftr.com. Subscribe to Unf*cking The Republic on Substack at unftr.substack.com to get the essays these episode are framed around sent to your inbox every week. Check out the UNFTR Pod Love playlist on Spotify: spoti.fi/3yzIlUP. Visit our bookshop.org page at bookshop.org/shop/UNFTRpod to find the full UNFTR book list, and find book recommendations from our Unf*ckers at bookshop.org/lists/unf-cker-book-recommendations. Access the UNFTR Musicless feed by following the instructions at unftr.com/accessibility. Unf*cking the Republic is produced by 99 and engineered by Manny Faces Media (mannyfacesmedia.com). Original music is by Tom McGovern (tommcgovern.com). The show is hosted by The Gipper and distributed by Slick Willy. Podcast art description: Image of the US Constitution ripped in the middle revealing white text on a blue background that says, "Unf*cking the Republic."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Çınla and Jenn interview Altuğ Yalçıntaş, Professor of Institutional Economics at Ankara University. Discussion topics include Professor Yalçıntaş' work on the history of the Coase Theorem, the need for research ethics in economics, and what it's like to do graduate work under the supervision of certain well-known economists.  Smith and Marx Walk into a Bar is supported by a grant from the History of Economics Society: http://historyofeconomics.org

On this episode of Porch Beers, Dr. Trogdon walks us through the agent vs. principle business models through the lens of the Wu Tang Clan and U2. Despite both groups having immense musical and financial success, they follow two different business models, where one pays their manager a fee and the other offers equity in the whole business. The topic unpacks the true question at the heart of the issue of would you give up equity in your financial future in exchange for a (hopefully) highly engaged business partner... or do you go on your own? Along the way Trog brings up the Coase Theorem and the concept of property rights, the future value of equity versus the present value of a commission, and the complexity of human beings and risk. Porch Beers is a series of casual episodes, where Brett asks Trog a question or two cold, that he hasn't heard prior to the conversation. Like most conversations they have over a beverage, Trog doesn't know what will be asked of him at the time. His vast expertise of finance and economic theory is put to the test when he's asked for advice or clarity on the topics discussed. In today's episode we stick to one topic, and walk through understanding the some of the why or why nots of giving up equity in your business, and ultimately if it's possible to predict the future. Thank you for listening! Please subscribe, share the episode with a friend and, leave a review to let us know what you think! Have a wonderful day!

Econtalk Podcast Notes Key Takeaways Who's property is the space between passengers on an airplane?“The fight for ownership is over ambiguity”– James SalzmanThis ambiguity is more defined on interpretations of ownership agreements and established social norms between passengers than the actual laws of the airlineThe recline button is the best example: there are no rules by the airline to not recline but rather an ownership agreement between passengers“The language of possession is one that happens almost completely outside the law”– Michael HellerThe norms of ownership have regional accentsOwnership is a remote control for social engineering – the owner of the resource shapes how the consumer gets things and consequently influences consumption behaviorNot all ownership conflicts need to end in polarized ‘I win, you lose' verdictsProperty rights are never static – they fluctuate in the face of scarcity, changes in population, or technological innovationThe new book,Mine!, outlines stories and anecdotes designed to communicate that ownership is more dependent on context and circumstance than lawRead the full notes @ podcastnotes.orgLaw professors Michael Heller and James Salzman talk about their book, Mine! with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Heller and Salzman argue that ownership is trickier and more complicated than it looks. While we tend to think of something as either mine or not mine, there's often ambiguity and a continuum about who owns what. Salzman and Heller explore a wide and surprising range of property rights from everyday life. The conversation includes a discussion of the insights of Ronald Coase on the assignment of property rights when rights conflict.

Econtalk Podcast Notes Key Takeaways Who's property is the space between passengers on an airplane?“The fight for ownership is over ambiguity”– James SalzmanThis ambiguity is more defined on interpretations of ownership agreements and established social norms between passengers than the actual laws of the airlineThe recline button is the best example: there are no rules by the airline to not recline but rather an ownership agreement between passengers“The language of possession is one that happens almost completely outside the law”– Michael HellerThe norms of ownership have regional accentsOwnership is a remote control for social engineering – the owner of the resource shapes how the consumer gets things and consequently influences consumption behaviorNot all ownership conflicts need to end in polarized ‘I win, you lose' verdictsProperty rights are never static – they fluctuate in the face of scarcity, changes in population, or technological innovationThe new book,Mine!, outlines stories and anecdotes designed to communicate that ownership is more dependent on context and circumstance than lawRead the full notes @ podcastnotes.orgLaw professors Michael Heller and James Salzman talk about their book, Mine! with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Heller and Salzman argue that ownership is trickier and more complicated than it looks. While we tend to think of something as either mine or not mine, there's often ambiguity and a continuum about who owns what. Salzman and Heller explore a wide and surprising range of property rights from everyday life. The conversation includes a discussion of the insights of Ronald Coase on the assignment of property rights when rights conflict.

Law professors Michael Heller and James Salzman talk about their book, Mine! with EconTalk host Russ Roberts. Heller and Salzman argue that ownership is trickier and more complicated than it looks. While we tend to think of something as either mine or not mine, there's often ambiguity and a continuum about who owns what. Salzman and Heller explore a wide and surprising range of property rights from everyday life. The conversation includes a discussion of the insights of Ronald Coase on the assignment of property rights when rights conflict.

מה משותף לקמפיין של 30 יום ניסיון, מודל פרימיום ונסיעת מבחן במכונית?בכל המקרים נוצרת תחושת בעלות של הלקוח על המוצר וכתוצאה מכך גובר הסיכוי שתיסגר העסקה.בפרק 04 נדבר על "אפקט הבעלות" - הנטייה של אנשים להעריך דברים שבבעלותם יותר משהם מעריכים מה שאינו בבעלותם. כמה שאלות שעליהן נענה בפרק:איך חברות כמו לינקדין, אפל ודואלינגו מניעות אותנו לשימוש באפליקציות שלהם?מה עשו בפארקים ציבוריים בארצות הברית כדי למנוע ממבקרים ללכלך?ואיך משמרים עובדים בארגון לאורך זמן?האזנה נעימה,תום ורועי~~~ ממליצים ללחוץ על הכפתור למעלה ולעקוב אחרי הפודקאסט (חבל לפספס פרקים חדשים, לא?).מוזמנים להצטרף (בחינם) למועדון מומחי ההתנהגות שלנו ולקבל את הניוזלטר ישירות אל האינבוקס שלכם.יש לך טלגרם? יש לנו שם קבוצה~~~

In this episode, Carlos, Scott, and Jenn are joined by Professor Steven Medema, Research Professor of Economics at Duke University and Associate Director of Duke's Center for the History of Political Economy. Topics include the history and meaning of the Coase Theorem, Professor Medema's recent book, The Economics Book: From Xenophon to Cryptocurrency, 250 Milestones in the History of Economics, and the question of progress in the field of the history of economic thought.  Smith and Marx Walk into a Bar is supported by a grant from the History of Economics Society: http://historyofeconomics.org

In a special Short Circuit, Harvard Law Professor Molly Brady joins us to talk about an untold story from the rise of zoning law. A lot of the blame for our affordable housing crisis is often placed on the case Euclid v. Ambler Realty, where the Supreme court declared zoning (which includes prohibiting apartments) constitutional. But zoning was not the first try at limiting multifamily housing in certain neighborhoods. Professor Brady discusses how property covenants and nuisance law were employed to limit the availability of housing, and how when that didn’t work planners turned to the heavy hand of zoning. Along the way we discuss property deeds, spontaneous order, immigration, and the ever-beloved Coase Theorem. iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/shor…uit/id309062019 Spotify: podcasters.spotify.com/podcast/1DFCq…Ehed/overview Stitcher: www.stitcher.com/podcast/institut…ce/short-circuit Google: play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#…odkfm5cpz7rlvf76a Newsletter: ij.org/about-us/shortcircuit/ Want to email us? shortcircuit@ij.org Transcript: https://ij.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Episode-148-Transcript.pdf Professor Molly Brady, http://www.maureenebrady.com/ Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/272/365/ The Coase Theorem, https://www.libertarianism.org/topics/ronald-h-coase From the IJ Archives: Let’s Take Zoning to Court, https://ij.org/sc_blog/lets-take-zoning-to-court/

One of Chicago's Best Ideas was the Coase Theorem, which reminds us daily that people can bargain around law or even before legal intervention is sought. But do we have too much law and too little bargaining around it? The number of cases and judges has grown dramatically over time and many problems are outsourced to the legal system, rather than being handled person-to-person. In this talk, I will consider conventional explanations for the astonishing growth of the legal system, and then suggest that it is not entirely good news. We have become addicted to law, and like most addictions, this one is difficult to undo and likely to grow. Saul Levmore is William B. Graham Distinguished Service Professor of Law. This Chicago's Best Ideas talk was presented on November 5, 2019.

One of Chicago's Best Ideas was the Coase Theorem, which reminds us daily that people can bargain around law or even before legal intervention is sought. But do we have too much law and too little bargaining around it? The number of cases and judges has grown dramatically over time and many problems are outsourced to the legal system, rather than being handled person-to-person. In this talk, I will consider conventional explanations for the astonishing growth of the legal system, and then suggest that it is not entirely good news. We have become addicted to law, and like most addictions, this one is difficult to undo and likely to grow. Saul Levmore is William B. Graham Distinguished Service Professor of Law. This Chicago's Best Ideas talk was presented on November 5, 2019.

Sachenrechtlicher Schutz des Eigentums: Inhalt und Grenzen des Eigentums, §§ 903 ff.BGB; Coase-Theorem; Der Herausgabeanspruch des Eigentümers, §§ 985, 986 BGB.

Besitzschutzansprüche (§§ 861, 862 BGB); Sachenrechtlicher Schutz des Eigentums: Inhalt und Grenzen des Eigentums (§§ 903 ff. BGB), Coase-Theorem, Der Herausgabeanspruch des Eigentümers (§§ 985, 986 BGB), Fall: "Beute-Kunst" in München.

Ondrej Balas is using Blockchain. This episode is sponsored by Smartsheet. Show Notes: Blockchain I mentioned the Coase Theorem, because I wanted an excuse to put my MBA to use. Bitcoin is perhaps the most popular currency that uses blockchain. There are a couple different uses of the term "key frame" in video. I think Ondrej was referring to it as it’s used in video compression. Lightning is a way to decentralize bitcoin transactions to improve/increas throughput Proof of Work in blockchain Some recent news about the Delaware Blockchain Initiative Videos on Channel 9: An Introduction to Blockchain with Mark Russinovich Inside Coco Framework, the Foundation of Blockchain for Enterprise with Mark Russinovich THAT conference Ondrej Balas is on Twitter. Want to be on the next episode? You can! All you need is the willingness to talk about something technical. Music is by Joe Ferg, check out more music on JoeFerg.com!

The general public sure thinks they are -- and sometimes, economists give them good reason to think so. Bob Murphy joins me to discuss (and critique) the Coase Theorem, which purports to solve an important economic puzzle, but which makes methodologically suspect moves that it appears only Austrians may have noticed.   (P.S. We're postponing the discussion of Public Choice, mentioned at the beginning, until a future episode.)  

My guest for this episode is Noel Johnson of George Mason University, and if that name sounds familiar, it's because he was the coauthor on the paper I discussed with Mark Koyama last month. Noel recently released a working paper titled "The Effects of Land Redistribution: Evidence from the French Revolution." It is coauthored with Theresa Finley and Raphael Franck. The paper examines the consequences of the land auctions held by the Revolutionary government in France. The abstract reads as follows: This study exploits the confiscation and auctioning off of Church property that occurred during the French Revolution to assess the role played by transaction costs in delaying the reallocation of property rights in the aftermath of fundamental institutional reform. French districts with a greater proportion of land redistributed during the Revolution experienced higher levels of agricultural productivity in 1841 and 1852 as well as more investment in irrigation and more efficient land use. We trace these increases in productivity to an increase in land inequality associated with the Revolutionary auction process. We also show how the benefits associated with the head-start given to districts with more Church land initially, and thus greater land redistribution by auction during the Revolution, dissipated over the course of the nineteenth century as other districts gradually overcame the transaction costs associated with reallocating the property rights associated with the feudal system. What's so interesting about this particular instance of land redistribution is the fact that it was all sold to the highest bidder rather than being given to the poor. This breaks with the pattern of most attempts at land reform throughout history. People have been trying to take land away from the rich and give it to the poor since at least Tiberius Gracchus in the second century BCE. But the Revolutionary government needed money and they needed it fast. So they concocted a plan to seize and auction off all French lands owned by the Catholic Church, which comprised about 6.5 percent of the country. Land auctions take time though, and the government desperately needed funds in the short term, so they issued a monetary instrument known as the assignat that could be used in these land auctions. The land was eventually auctioned off and then traded in secondary markets, where much of it was consolidated into large estates that could employ capital-intensive agricultural practices on a large scale. The evidence suggests that these land auctions added to the productivity of the regions where they occurred. Noel argues that this occurred because the reduction in transaction costs allowed for a more efficient allocation of property rights. One could argue, however, that the Church might have simply owned more productive land to begin with, and the paper uses a series of identification strategies to show that this is not the main driver of their results. Related Links: McCloskey (1998) on the Coase theorem. Galor and Moav (2004) on the relationship between inequality and productivity in economies dependent on physical capital vs human capital. Gallica, the website where you can download a ton of digitized French archives. Acemoglu, Johnson, and Robinson (2005) on Atlantic trade. Rachel Laudan discusses the history of potatoes and other foods on EconTalk. Photo credit: Early French banknote issue during the French Revolution (Assignat) for 400 livres, (1792), from the National Numismatic Collection at the Smithsonian Institution.  

Two of the best ideas of the last half-century describe strategies for using legal remedies to solve social problems. One is the concentration of liability on a well-situated problem solver, or “least cost-avoider,” who can always contract out the work to be done (thus reflecting Chicago's Very Best and Biggest Idea, the Coase Theorem). But another is the opposite of the first, for it involves the distribution, or spreading, of legal responsibility across many potential problem solvers, who might cooperate or work alone. Comparative negligence and Superfund liability for environmental harms reflect this strategy. This Chicago's Best Ideas talk explores this tug-of-war, or evolutionary pattern, involving the two opposing strategies. How does law know which to use? Most important, what is the likely evolution of law as citizens call on Big Government to solve their big problems, like climate change or access to health care, and how does technological change alter the likely balance between these two strategies? Saul Levmore is the William B. Graham Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School. This talk was recorded on October 21, 2014, as part of the Chicago's Best Ideas lecture series.

Two of the best ideas of the last half-century describe strategies for using legal remedies to solve social problems. One is the concentration of liability on a well-situated problem solver, or “least cost-avoider,” who can always contract out the work to be done (thus reflecting Chicago's Very Best and Biggest Idea, the Coase Theorem). But another is the opposite of the first, for it involves the distribution, or spreading, of legal responsibility across many potential problem solvers, who might cooperate or work alone. Comparative negligence and Superfund liability for environmental harms reflect this strategy. This Chicago's Best Ideas talk explores this tug-of-war, or evolutionary pattern, involving the two opposing strategies. How does law know which to use? Most important, what is the likely evolution of law as citizens call on Big Government to solve their big problems, like climate change or access to health care, and how does technological change alter the likely balance between these two strategies? Saul Levmore is the William B. Graham Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School. This talk was recorded on October 21, 2014, as part of the Chicago's Best Ideas lecture series.

We’re back with knees and gay marriage. And constitutional scholar Lori Ringhand. In the battle between recliners and knee defenders, Joe tells us the real enemy is the airline who has sold the same space twice. Somehow nose-punching, rapid window shade flipping, and the high arctic figure into the discussion. Turning to Judge Posner’s smackdown of midwestern marriage bans, we start with style: is there such a thing as too much smack? Then we turn to the really interesting bit, Posner’s reimagining of judicial scrutiny of discrimination. Also: speed traps. This show’s links: Lori Ringhand’s faculty profile, books, and articles Episode 31: Knee Defender, in which we first spoke of the airplane seat reclining controversy Neil Buchanan, Airplane Seatbacks, the Coase Theorem, and Simplistic Solutions to Difficult Questions Josh Barro, Don’t Want Me to Recline My Airline Seat? You Can Pay Me Katia Hetter, Seat Recline Fight Diverts Another Flight Baskin v. Bogan, Judge Posner’s opinion for the Seventh Circuit striking down marriage bans in Indiana and Wisconsin Robicheaux v. Caldwell, Judge Feldman’s opinion upholding Louisiana’s marriage ban Mark Joseph Stern, Judge Posner’s Gay Marriage Opinion Is a Witty, Deeply Moral Masterpiece Christian Turner, 404: Argument Not Found Brown v. Board of Education What Brown v. Board of Education Should Have Said, Jack Balkin ed. Episode 30: A Filled Milk Caste, in which we discuss United States v. Carolene Products Windsor v. United States (the Second Circuit opinion that led to the Supreme Court case) and SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories (a Ninth Circuit case), each deciding to apply heightened scrutiny to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation Romer v. Evans, nominally using the deferential rational basis standard to strike down a state’s constitutional prohibition on any governmental efforts to protect gays from discrimination Special Guest: Lori Ringhand.

Our labor day episode, in which we discuss: Judge Posner’s castigation of state attorneys in gay marriage cases, professionalism (shiver) and politeness, the knee defender and recliners, airplane boarding and luggage retrieval, the exciting new adventures of the Town of Greece, satanists, and contempt of cop. This show’s links: Seventh Circuit arguments in Baskin v. Bogan and Wolf v. Walker Christian Turner, 404: Argument Not Found Paul Ford, How to Be Polite About the duty to rescue Paul Bloom, Against Empathy in the Boston Review, with respondents Richard Greenstein, Against Professionalism The Knee Defender AP, Plane Diverted as Passengers Fight over Seat Reclining CBC News, Fired RIM Execs “Chewed Through Restraints” on Flight Josh Barro, Don’t Want Me to Recline My Airline Seat? You Can Pay Me About the so-called Coase Theorem Stanley Coren, Is It Safe to Ship Dogs or Cats by Air? About boarding patterns on airplanes Dahlia Lithwick, Checking In on the Town of Greece Episode 19: The Prayer Abides (guest Nathan Chapman), discussing the Town of Greece case About the Streisand effect Jack Jenkins, How Satanists Are Testing The Limits Of Religious Freedom In Oklahoma Swartz v. Insogna About contempt of cop

[Conf.] This International Conference on Regulatory Competition in Contract Law and Dispute Resolution will bring together leading scholars in the field of contract law and dispute resolution both from the US and Europe. Important research papers on the law market in these fields will be presented and commented upon by at least one discussant. The results of the conference should be of high interest not only for academics, but also for practitioners and lawmakers. | Center for Advanced Studies: 14.10.2011 | Speakers: Horst Eidenmüller, Gregor Bachmann

Professor Rae explores the creation of incentives and disincentives for individual action. The discussion begins with the Coase Theorem, which outlines three conditions for efficient transactions: 1) clear entitlements to property, 2) transparency, and 3) low transaction costs. Professor Rae then tells the story of a whaling law case from 1881 to highlight the power of incentives and property rights. The conversation then moves to Hernando de Soto's portrayal of the development of property rights in the American West, and then shifts to a discussion of New Haven deeds, property values, and valuation of real estate. The lecture concludes with a discussion of Mory's.

Professor Rae explores the creation of incentives and disincentives for individual action. The discussion begins with the Coase Theorem, which outlines three conditions for efficient transactions: 1) clear entitlements to property, 2) transparency, and 3) low transaction costs. Professor Rae then tells the story of a whaling law case from 1881 to highlight the power of incentives and property rights. The conversation then moves to Hernando de Soto's portrayal of the development of property rights in the American West, and then shifts to a discussion of New Haven deeds, property values, and valuation of real estate. The lecture concludes with a discussion of Mory's.

In this video, we show how bees and pollination demonstrate the Coase Theorem in action: when transaction costs are low and property rights are clearly defined, private arrangements ensure that the market works even when there are externalities. Under...