Obesity remains a serious health problem and it is no secret that many people want to lose weight. Behavioral economists typically argue that “nudges” help individuals with various decisionmaking flaws to live longer, healthier, and better lives. In an article in the new issue of Regulation, Michael L. Marlow discusses how nudging by government differs from nudging by markets, and explains why market nudging is the more promising avenue for helping citizens to lose weight.
In Bootleggers & Baptists: How Economic Forces and Moral Persuasion Interact to Shape Regulatory Politics, economists Bruce Yandle and Adam Smith explain how money and morality are often combined in politics to produce arbitrary regulations benefiting cronies, while constraining productive economic activities by the general public.
Featuring John Mueller, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute, Senior Research Scientist, Mershon Center, Ohio State University; and Mark G. Stewart, Visiting Fellow, Cato Institute, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Newcastle, Australia; moderated by Laura Odato, Director of Government Affairs, Cato Institute.
Join us for a non-technical primer on risk and cost-benefit analysis with applications to policies ranging from homeland security to climate change. Our panel will consider key issues as probability neglect, cost neglect, and acceptable risk. In general, the place to begin is not with the perennial question, “Are we safer?” but rather with the rarely asked, “How safe are we?” Increases in domestic homeland security spending since 9/11 exceed $1 trillion. How many post-9/11 security programs reduce risk enough to justify their cost? Panelists John Mueller and Mark Stewart are the authors of Terror, Security, and Money (Oxford University Press, 2011).