Levitt Libertarians?

"Completely idiotic" and "rife with internal contradictions" are not the same thing. For example, subsidizing art created for the purpose of being offensive to certain religious groups is idiotic, but not contradictory. And taxing everyone to support national defense, and using that money to defend the freedom of speech pacifists and supporters of "the other side" is contradictory, but in my opinion not idiotic.

Having said that, the example of gambling law is spot-on. To put it even more starkly, private gambling is illegal ostensibly because it's immoral, but state-run gambling is OK because it raises money. Clearly, to resolve the contradiction we have to either allow all private gambling (at published odds, etc.), or ban state lotteries. The current system makes sense only as a tax on people who are bad at math. ;-)

I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in that comment. Levitt intentionally avoids ideological debates as a matter of course. It's part of his persona - he likes to be the "I'm just relating the facts" kind of guy.

Danke, mein Freund! Du sollst das gleiche ueber mich schreiben.

The laws on gaming, just as the laws on gifting, are extensions of progressivity in the tax code. If they weren't forbidden or heavily taxed -- an average person could distribute their gains and losses to favor their tax liability. Currently, only above average people can employ such strategies.

The unintended consequences of envy, as it's reflected in tax code and law is really quite extensive and remarkable.

He is not much of a libertarian but he has studied economic behavior.

Politicians seem to despise economics and economists.

Nuff said