tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post8738154573035250761..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: Regulation: Redistribution or Efficiency?Eric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-78533371011267199432009-08-16T13:00:33.012-05:002009-08-16T13:00:33.012-05:00I don't think that democracy, redistribution, ...I don't think that democracy, redistribution, and New Haven firefighters have much to do with to the merits of a CFPA.<br /><br />One of the assumptions behind the CFPA is that clearer contracts would tone down certain quasi-fraudulent abuses (e.g. prime borrowers being put into subprime mortgages, thus paying an unnecessarily high interest rate, the assumption being they were somehow prevented from shopping around). It's redistributionist in the same way that voiding fraudulent transactions is redistributionist (from the con man to the mark). Enforcing contracts is also redistributionist (from the breacher to the counterparty), and this doesn't even require regulators (or are you against judges and contracts as well?).<br /><br />A better argument would be to look at the various state regulations (e.g. of credit cards and payday loans) to see whether consumer financial contract regulations on clarity of contracts have much (or any) impact on reducing sharp practice (however this is defined). Some sort of costing would be useful, e.g. it only costs $0.10 of regulators to save $10 of dodginess.<br /><br />I haven't managed to care about the issue just yet, but I think both sides could improve the quality of their arguments.The Recovering Bankerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08876928207487553561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-88733815567081546512009-08-14T09:23:28.772-05:002009-08-14T09:23:28.772-05:00per distribution of opportunities, that's a go...per distribution of opportunities, that's a good other reason.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-22126430609654810622009-08-14T08:59:12.680-05:002009-08-14T08:59:12.680-05:00J: are you referring to disincentive effects? I t...J: are you referring to disincentive effects? I think these are just more obvious when youu give someone $10k. When you do this implicitly through several independent preferences, it is worse.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-44553642774132475392009-08-14T08:46:45.278-05:002009-08-14T08:46:45.278-05:00it is better to given every Hmong a check for $X ...<i>it is better to given every Hmong a check for $X </i> I dont know about the Hmong, but people with experience in charity work would never do that. <br /><br />Regarding the horrible clusterfuck caused by well-meant regulation in the banking industry, it is nothing what regulation has done to manufacturing. There must be a word to describe it, but I dont know it.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05676167615981895061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-23915652552027614562009-08-13T21:48:54.741-05:002009-08-13T21:48:54.741-05:00"One can argue that inegalitarian distributio..."One can argue that inegalitarian distributions are bad for several reasons..."<br /><br />the problem is not inequality of income or wealth, it's inequality of opportunity. symptom and cause.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com