“The reason France does not require aid is not because some external group took pity on the French, but that they were able to generate exponential economic growth themselves. This makes it puzzling that philosophers write long books about aid without mentioning economic growth, and generally seem to imply that the path to escaping poverty lies through individual altruism. Why ignore the only mechanism that has ever succeeded in lifting millions of people out of poverty when thinking about poverty?”
Author: Bryan Caplan
Bryan Caplan is Professor of Economics at George Mason University and Senior Scholar at the Mercatus Center. He is the author of The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies, named “the best political book of the year” by the New York Times, and Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent Is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think. He has published in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the American Economic Review, the Economic Journal, the Journal of Law and Economics, and Intelligence, and has appeared on 20/20, FoxNews, and C-SPAN.
Governing Least: What’s Really Wrong with Utilitarianism
One argument against utilitarianism is that no one actually follows it. I call this the Argument from Hypocrisy. A better objection, though, is that even highly scrupulous utilitarians don’t comply with their stated principles; I call this the Argument from Conscience.
Dan Moller’s Governing Least
Michael Huemer’s The Problem of Political Authority is definitely my favorite work of libertarian political philosophy. Dan Moller’s new Governing Least, however, is definitely now my second-favorite work of libertarian political philosophy. The two books have much in common: Both use common-sense ethics to argue for libertarian politics. Both are calm, logical, and ever-mindful of potential criticisms. …
More Bang for Your Buck; or, Better Ways to Buy Your Happiness
Money has little effect on happiness. Ancient Greeks like Epicurus said it, and modern empirical psychology confirms it. Why do we have so much trouble accepting this? In part, because our immediate reaction to money is highly favorable – and that sticks in our minds. Before long, however, hedonic adaptation kicks in. We start to take our good fortune for granted… and then we largely forget that our fortune is good.
Why I’m an Economic Optimist but Happiness Pessimist
When I insist that standard measures sharply underestimate economic growth, it’s easy to accuse me of motivated reasoning. Before you make this accusation, however, consider the whole picture. What possible agenda could I advance by simultaneously claiming that GDP has greatly increased, but brought us little joy?
Reflections on The Sopranos
I just finished re-watching the entirety of The Sopranos, HBO’s classic Mafia drama. I saw it season-by-season when it originally aired (1999-2007), and I still hew to the allegedly philistine view that the ending was not only bad, but insulting. Overall, though the show’s reputation is well-deserved. Here are the top social science insights I take away.
Paasche Says Progress
If you don’t remember 1990, the modern world is easy to take for granted. The rest of us, however, know – or at least ought to know – that modernity is a living miracle. Though we don’t own fifty cars each, we still enjoy fabulous luxuries beyond of the budget of the richest residents of 1990. Stagnationists live to belittle these gains, but that’s not science; it’s perspective.
The Depression Preference
When I describe mental illness as “an extreme, socially disapproved preference,” the most convincing counter-example people offer is depression. Do I really think people “want to be depressed” or choose depression as a bizarre alternative lifestyle?
Reviewing Paranoia
Hysteria and paranoia aside, what’s wrong with the book? Salam engages in extreme reverse engineering, where even the most favorable facts about immigration somehow become extra reasons to oppose it.
The Dissident Ambassador
Am I saying that professors should teach whatever they feel is true? No; a thousand times no. If you use your “feelings” to form beliefs, you shouldn’t be a professor at all. The first fiduciary duty of every intellectual is to set emotions aside, and calmly and patiently study a wide range of arguments and evidence.