Another Review of Freedomnomics
Labels: Economics, Freedomnomics
Welcome! Please e-mail me with any questions at johnrlott@aol.com.
Labels: Economics, Freedomnomics
posted by John Lott at 3:30 PM
Amazed how lucky I am that I have had jobs where I could just think about whatever I wanted to think about. This summer I will be moving to the University of Maryland. Previously I held positions at the University of Chicago, Yale University, Stanford, UCLA, Wharton, and Rice and was the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission during 1988 and 1989. I have published over 90 articles in academic journals. I received my Ph.D. in economics from UCLA in 1984.
-Research finding a drop in violent crime rates from Right-to-carry laws
-Ranking Economists
-National Academies of Science Panel on Firearms
-Baghdad murder rate
-Arming Pilots
-Appalachian law school attack
-Sources for Defensive Gun Uses
-The Merced Pitchfork Killings
-Fraudulent website pretending to be run by me
-Steve Levitt's Correction Letter
-Ian Ayres and John Donohue
-Other issues regarding Steve Levitt
-General discussion of my 1997 and 2002 surveys as well as related surveys
-Problems with Wikipedia
-Errata for Gun Books
Economist and Law Professor David D. Friedman's Blog
Economist Robert G. Hansen's Blog
A debate that I had with George Mason University's Robert Ehrlich on guns
Lyonette Louis-Jacques's page on Firearms Regulation Worldwide
An interview concerning More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws
The End of Myth: An Interview with Dr. John Lott
Art DeVany's website, one of the more innovative economists in the last few decades
St. Cloud State University Scholars
Bryan Caplan at George Mason University
Alphecca -- weekly review on the media's coverage of guns
Xrlq -- Some interesting coverage of the law.
Career Police Officer
Gun Law News
Georgia Right-to-Carry
Darnell's The Independent Conservative Blog
Clayton Cramer's Blog
My hidden mathematical ability (a math professor with the same name)
geekwitha45
My Old AEI Web Page
Wrightwing's blog
Al Lowe's blog
St. Maximos' Hut
Dad29
Sonya Jones takes on the Enviros
Eric Rasmusen
William Sjostrom
Dr. T's EconLinks.com
Interview with National Review Online
Updated Media Analysis of Appalachian Law School Attack
Journal of Legal Studies paper on spoiled ballots during the 2000 Presidential Election
Data set from USA Today, STATA 7.0 data set
"Do" File for some of the basic regressions from the paper
Straight Shooting: Firearms, Economics and Public Policy
Are Predatory Commitments Credible? Who Should the Courts Believe?
2 Comments:
Someone there brought up the issue of patents as a government granted monopoly. Many libertarians, like Richard Epstein, seem just fine with them. Recently I have turned away from them, primarily due to Stephan Kinsella's postings at the Mises website. As a lawyer (an I.P lawyer, ironically enough) associated with the Rothbard strain of Austrian economics, he prefers mostly rights-based arguments, like in his Against Intellectual Property. I'm mostly interested in consequences, which is why I used to think patents were a good thing due to the incentives to innovate they gave. Things like Patents and Copyrights: Do the Benefits Exceed the Costs?, There Is No Such Thing As A Free Patent, How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth Century World Fairs, Patents Chilling Effects on Science, How Gene Patents Are Putting Your Health at Rish and the related Patenting Life by Michael Crichton, this and A Patent Lie on the software industry, this on the fashion industry, the book Do Patents Work? whose conclusions are summarized here are all examples. I realize that's a lot and don't expect you to thoroughly examine them all, but it was something it was an issue I never even questioned before and now I do. In your book you discuss how some people assume there are "market failures" that the market can't resolve and require government intervention, when it frequently turns out that the market finds a way to solve the problem, whether with reputation or using advertisements on the radio. People often forget about government failure, which seems to me more prevalent than market failure, and considering that it is the government that grants intellectual property and decides what is or isn't sufficiently original and it is government courts in which cases are tried, that does not bode well for the patent system.
Without patents to protect the intellectual property we wouldn't have many inventions that we have today. Do these opponents want to get rid of copyright protection? If so, we wouldn't have very many new books either. Sorry that I don't have more time to deal with this right now.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home