1. Show or hide comments about the document.

  2. Search over the document's text.

  3. Share the document through social networks or e-mail.

  4. After selecting an area on the page.

  5. ...you can:
    copy the text
    share the segment
    comment
    cite the document

Fall 2008
ISSN 0890-913X
Volume 24, Number 1

Toward a Libertarian Reconstruction of Neoclassical Welfare Theory

Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, San Jose State University
Download Share e-mail
  • << Back to editing
  • Previous version by
  • << Older
  • Newer >>
  • Revert to this one
  • Edit
  • Fullscreen
  • Show comments
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • Zoom:
     
     
  • Page:  / 12
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • Line spacing:
     
     
  • Word spacing:
     
     
  • Search:FindClose
 
search results
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
612
792
1
0
/jpe/index.php?action=ajax&rs=GDMgetPage&rsargs[]=Fall2008 7.pdf&rsargs[]=0
TheJournalofPrivateEnterprise24(1),2008,119-130TowardaLibertarianReconstructionofNeoclassicalWelfareTheoryJeffreyRogersHummelSanJoseStateUniversityAbstractManylibertarians,especiallythoseinclinedtowardtheAustrianschoolofeconomics,counterthemarket-failurejustificationforgovernmentinterventionbydenyinganylegitimacywhatsoevertotheneoclassicalconceptofefficiency.Butproperlyinterpreted,neoclassicalefficiency,ratherthanprovidinganopen-endedjustificationforallsortsofgovernmentintervention,providesoneofthemostpowerfulandcomprehensiveobjectionstogovernmentcoercioningeneral.JELCodes:D60,H10,H40Keywords:Welfareeconomics,Efficiency,Publicgoods,GovernmentI.IntroductionManylibertarians,aswellasotherfree-marketadvocates,haveextremereservationsaboutthewelfaretheoryofneoclassicaleconomics.Theyespeciallyobjecttothederivativenotionofmarketfailureandthefrequencywithwhichitisemployedtojustifygovernmentintervention.WhenlibertarianeconomistBryanCaplanrecentlydefendedwelfareeconomicsandotheraspectsofneoclassicalanalysisfromthecriticismsoftheAustrianschool,heelicitedanarrayofdissentingrepliesfromsuchAustriansasWalterBlock,JörgGuidoHülsmann,andEdwardStringham.Thesecriticsutterlyrejectneoclassicalefficiencyasacoherentstandardforcomparingdifferentoutcomesintherealworld.Indeed,Blockhasgonesofarastoassertthat“[t]herearenosuchthingsasmarketfailures.1IhavereceivedhelpfulsuggestionsfromPeterBoettke,MarkBrady,ChristopherCoyne,WarrenGibson,DavidHenderson,JosephSalerno,andEdwardP.Stringham,butnoneofthembearanyresponsibilityforthefinaloutcome.1Caplan(1999).ThefirstroundofcritiquescamefromBlock(1999)andHülsmann(1999).Caplan(2001)replied,whichinspiredafurtherresponsefromBlock(2003).Althoughmyarticlefocusesonwelfareeconomics,thedebate119
GLIFOS-digital_archive