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 Roger Pilon, Vice President for Legal Affairs, Cato Institute vs. J. Peter Byrne, Faculty Director, Georgetown Environmental Policy and Law Institute
On February 22 the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the first two of three property rights cases before it this term, Kelo v. New London and Lingle v. Chevron. Kelo asks whether government can transfer property from one person to another for the sole purpose of possible economic development. Lingle asks whether a commercial rent control scheme is constitutional when it advances no legitimate state interest. The Cato Institute and the Georgetown Environmental Policy and Law Institute filed briefs on opposite sides of the two cases. Please join us for what promises to be a spirited debate on this most basic of constitutional issues.