SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Kevin Quinn)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:27 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
 
>It is precisely in this respect that the characteristics of jointness and 
>non-exclusion, when properly understood from the property rights 
perspective, 
>show their relevance. And it is precisely for this reason that I regard 
>Samuelson's exercises as part of the dark ages. 
 
 
This is simply absurd! I don't know about Coase himself, but the use of his 
work among Coasians such as yourself seems to be a exercise in ideology.  
You insist that we use your vocabulary, which lumps together apples,  
oranges and pears and calls them all transactions costs. There are no  
*ideas* in Coase that weren't already around. What's new is an obfuscating  
vocabulary whose main role is to bash the government and offer more  
apologies for laissez-faire. 
 
Kevin Quinn 
 
 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2