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 Sol Stern, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute; Gary Huggins, Director, Commission on No Child Left Behind, Aspen Institute; Andrew Coulson, Director, Center for Educational Freedom, Cato Institute; and John Merrifield, Professor of Economics, University of Texas at San Antonio. Moderated by
Ben Wildavsky, Senior Fellow in Research and Policy, Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
A quarter century ago, A Nation at Risk shook the country and energized two education reform movements: school choice, and government-driven standards and accountability. For years, proponents of these reforms coexisted, even cooperated, but rifts have begun to appear. “Instructionists” now argue that markets without government standards are doomed to fail, while market reformers assail government standards as futile and anti-competitive. Please join our panelists as they debate the role of these reforms in fixing American education, 25 years after A Nation at Risk.