ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
Please God, just one more bubble.
Have you seen that onion story? Too true.
Here, here. Such legislation would not only be silly, but it would increase transaction costs across the board thus punishing the non-idiots amongst us. Gross!
Normally the fools and their money are separated when a downturn hits the economy and overlevereged positions have to be closed out. In a healthy economy, the prudent savers are then in a position to use their savings to invest in any liquidated assets and we go on from there.
When the government continues to stimulate for years on end, the prudent investors slowly lose their savings and only risky behavior remains. Soon we get to the place where we start defaulting on our mortgages. Unfortunately, continuing to stimulate the economy is not the right solution for this situation. If we do not allow fools to lose their money, we only end up with more fools. As scary as it sounds, the Fed needs to raise interest rates.
I agree, but merely having some regulation in place that may obstruct the next recurrence until they re-examine and rethink why it was created in the first place and decide it is no longer needed may delay the next one.
There's no need for such regulation anyway. Just promise to hang any CEO who ruins his company. Disincentives matter.
PS If hanging seems a little extreme, force them to divorce, and marry women 20 years older than their present wives.
"PS If hanging seems a little extreme, force them to divorce, and marry women 20 years older than their present wives. "
Forced a CEO to marry someone 10 years younger than them does not seem to be that big of a punishment
;)
So idiots deserve to be punished. It just so happens that we have all been an idiot sometime.
"So idiots deserve to be punished. It just so happens that we have all been an idiot sometime."
I think the comments about creating positive law to punish CEOs was facetious; designed to get a chuckle.
However, idiotic action should not be divordced from the natural consequences of that action. It can be looked upon as "punishment", but I choose to see it as Nature's way of teaching us, "don't do that."
If we shield idiots from the consequences of their actions, they not only remain idiots, but they conclude that idiocy pays, breeding more idiocy.