The Past is the Future is the Past

[Professor S]

This is a fascinating interview with Donahue from 1979. The parallels from then to today are astounding. He also is the most intelligent advocate the free markets I've ever heard, and he should be... he won the Nobel Prize for economics.

[Professor S]

On a side note, I really miss television like this. Its just a great interview that explores issues in depth.

[thatmariolover]

I just miss quality reporting in general. At work so I can't watch the videos now but I'll be back once I have.

[manasecret]

Good quality interview. There must still be such stuff out there somewhere today. Just hard to find it through all the noise, maybe?

I feel laissez-faire, Adam Smith style economy is best, but I also think some government regulation is inevitable. When virtually all companies in an industry are using unethical practices and getting away with it, what other option is there besides government regulation?

But he also seems for regulation, but in a different way. For example with car pollution, he says that instead of putting in regulations forcing car companies to lower their car emissions, we should tax car emissions to give them the incentive to do it. Both sound like regulation to me. Which works better then is the question.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by manasecret

But he also seems for regulation, but in a different way. For example with car pollution, he says that instead of putting in regulations forcing car companies to lower their car emissions, we should tax car emissions to give them the incentive to do it. Both sound like regulation to me. Which works better then is the question.

David Cameron (British House of Commons - Conservative) has a similar idea, but even less onerous. His idea what to use human psychology, and instead of punishing behavior (creating a defensive and spiteful response in many), educate and allow people to self-regulate. EX: Instead of just having your energy consumption on your energy bill, also show an average, a high and low. That way you know where you stand and it may open eyes to areas where people could make informed and therefore more intelligent choices.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by manasecret

I feel laissez-faire, Adam Smith style economy is best, but I also think some government regulation is inevitable. When virtually all companies in an industry are using unethical practices and getting away with it, what other option is there besides government regulation?

But he also seems for regulation, but in a different way. For example with car pollution, he says that instead of putting in regulations forcing car companies to lower their car emissions, we should tax car emissions to give them the incentive to do it. Both sound like regulation to me. Which works better then is the question.

Yup, it makes sense. But most republicans these days would be repulsed by the idea of increasing taxes for such reasons. There's a difference between the government giving companies incentives to make good products, opposed to forcing them to.

Honestly there's a fine line between increasing taxes for not doing what the government wants, or simply having a cash penalty. These days saying the words "raising taxes" seems to be a sin, even if it makes sense.