Show Notes
Theory is elegant, but even the most well-designed and well-intentioned theory of regulation may not survive the acid test of reality. First, Paul and Peter discuss the dilemma faced by federal regulators trying to address Boeing’s safety record and the risk that (in)action might push more passengers to drive instead. Then Peter offers a counterintuitive take on the Supreme Court ending Chevron deference, deflating some of the hot air from the decision’s most ardent supporters and critics. Finally, they are joined by Professor Thomas Hazlett to dig deeper into the surprising outcomes from the T-Mobile – Sprint megamerger in 2020. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
More from Unintended Consequences
Abundance is a tempting goal as Americans face shortages of housing and rising energy prices. But there are government regulations and interest groups that fight efforts to build more housing and energy infrastructure. In this episode, Paul and Peter discuss Jonathan Adler's review for Regulation of Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson’s best-selling book Abundance, the need for further regulatory reform, and whether the movement would benefit from a fuller embrace of public choice economics. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Rent control is a tempting solution to a very real problem, the lack of quality, affordable housing in tightly regulated municipalities. But controlling prices leads to significant, negative outcomes that not only discourage the building of additional homes but also harm the very class of renters who the policy attempts to help. But in this episode, Paul and Peter discuss the jurisprudence on rent control as covered in a recent Regulation Magazine article, “Rent Control and the Constitution” by Paul Godek, who argues that rent control is an unjust taking similar to abuses of the eminent domain process. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
There are structures and institutions that shape our lives in significant ways and yet are almost entirely hidden from our attention. Delaware’s overwhelming dominance in corporate law is one of them, so powerful that, thus far at least, even the wealthiest man in the world, Elon Musk, has found his Tesla compensation contract stymied. In this episode, Paul and Peter discuss the Regulation Magazine cover article “The Coming Privatization of Corporate Law” by Dorothy Lund and Eric Talley, and their surprising prediction about the future of corporate law. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
There’s an ongoing debate among economists about the most effective policy for incentivizing a reduction in carbon emissions. It’s essentially Team Carbon Tax vs Team Green New Deal, which is a debate over whether prices or subsidies are the more effective tool. In this episode, Paul and Peter discuss the paper “Green Waste” by Ingvil Gaarder et al and its surprising findings about Norway’s experiment with green subsidies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
During the covid pandemic, it became popular for folks to say “just follow the science” when it came to making decisions about medical treatment and public health. But in this episode – which covers ivermectin, psychologists’ prescription authority, and warning labels for pediatric anti-depressants – Paul and Peter discuss just how complicated the science can be and why both "just following the science" and "doing your own research" are inadequate responses.