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 Sandra Boyd, Vice President, Strategic Communications and Outreach, Achieve, Inc.; Lindsey Burke, Policy Analyst, Heritage Foundation; Michael Petrilli, Vice President for National Programs & Policy, Thomas B. Fordham Institute; and Neal McCluskey, Associate Director, Center for Educational Freedom, Cato Institute; moderated by Adam Schaeffer, Policy Analyst, Center for Educational Freedom, Cato Institute.
With the Common Core State Standards Initiative likely to release the final version of its English and mathematics standards in early June, and states having to decide whether or not to adopt them, a crucial question has been neglected in the public policy debate: Is there good reason to believe that national standards will improve educational outcomes? Please join us for a discussion of the logic behind, and evidence on, national education standards, at this pivotal moment in the history of American education.