Et Cetera – 25 January 2014

  • Michael Munger, in a response to James Stoner, distinguishes between “voluntary” and “euvoluntary” exchanges, and argues that government should allow them both. He also extends Stoner’s insight that men and women do not always behave morally in markets to the voting booth. This is well worth reading.
  • Michael Munger, again, this time arguing that greed isn’t good, it’s just a fact. Munger here takes that insight and examines it from a number of different angles to point out that we would do well to embrace a system that is capable of harnessing or channeling (NOT endorsing) that greed in order to improve the allocation of resources. This post is longer, but equally well worth reading.
  • Art Carden and Steve Horwitz argue that cries of “market failure” rarely recognize the shortcomings inherent in state intervention, and that it is often not obvious that states can improve on market failure-type situations. An insightful and nuanced piece.
  • This will, I think, be the most controversial of the articles in this Et Cetera, but clarifying the use of the word “privilege” in libertarian conversations. This is an issue that has been coming up a lot recently (at least in the circles I follow), so I thought it’d be nice to tack on an article related to it here. I’ve not thought through his issue enough to really take a stand one way or the other but my initial face-value reading of it seems in line with what Shaffer has written in her post.
This entry was posted in Et Cetera and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink .

Leave a Reply