Showing posts with label Bruce Yandle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bruce Yandle. Show all posts

Thursday, June 26, 2014

Video: Bruce Yandle on The Bootleggers and Baptists

Professor Bruce Yandle explains his Bootleggers and Baptists theory 

From LearnLiberty.org (hat tip Prof Art Carden) 
We all know bootleggers and Baptists rarely see eye to eye. Ask one group and its members will probably tell you they despise the other group. Yet, when it comes to government regulation, both bootleggers and Baptists work together. Prof. Bruce Yandle explains that this happens because both groups actually desire the same outcome. The Baptists benefit, for example, from laws that make the sale of alcoholic beverages illegal on Sundays. Bootleggers benefit because now they can sell alcohol on Sundays. Groups who would never meet together but both desire the same outcome can often be found upon closer examination of many government regulations. Prof. Yandle demonstrates how environmental regulations fit into the bootlegger-Baptist theory.

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Quote of the Day: The Social Costs of Regulations

Rahm’s Rule is a useful accessory to a body of theory that seeks to explain the political economy of regulation. The rule tells us that major crises can provide cover for distributing benefits to targeted special interest groups. The greater the magnitude of a given crisis and the shorter the interval for forming legislation to deal with it, the larger the spread of pork that can be packed into the final legislation. Rahm’s Rule is a guarantee that efforts to resolve a deadline-based crisis will go on to the very last minute. We might keep this in mind for the next deadline-driven crisis.

In today’s economy, regulation is found at every meaningful margin. Politicians set and rearrange prices for important services and products for consumers nationwide. They open and close market entry and give advantage to favored groups by altering taxes, depreciation schedules, and other regulatory schemes. Doing all this in the full light of day and with full and open debate would be a challenge. But then there are crises to serve the politicians’ interests. Some arise spontaneously and some are created or magnified consciously by the politicians themselves. The sequestration element in the fiscal cliff story is an example. The shouts of crisis and the end of western civilization that preceded TARP are another. In all cases, Rahm’s Rule applies: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”
This is from Professor Bruce Yandle at the FEE, discussing the social costs of regulations, as well as, the concentration of benefits from arbitrary regulations that are funneled into political power blocs, which are especially pronounced during the implementation of crisis management measures.

One can't help but suspect that much of the ongoing and past crises may have been engineered or concocted by politicians and their cronies as part of advancing their interests.