Comments on: Ken Rogoff http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/ It is all obvious or trivial except... Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:24:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: AntiCitizenOne http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/comment-page-1/#comment-2204 AntiCitizenOne Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:25:35 +0000 http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/#comment-2204 At least Geonomics charges people for rent seeking, by creating a market for the property owners right to stop others using it. At least Geonomics charges people for rent seeking, by creating a market for the property owners right to stop others using it.

]]> By: So Much For Subtlety http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/comment-page-1/#comment-2193 So Much For Subtlety Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:38:23 +0000 http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/#comment-2193 The other thing to look at is the cause of the inequality. In a system of perfect competition everyone would be paid the same except for the costs of things like further or Higher Education. The difference is, presumably, rent seeking of one sort or another. When this involves the Government legislating special favours for their friends this is a bad thing. However it might also include things like patents. Innovation must drive inequality because whoever invents a new gizmo gets a couple of decades competition-lite if not exactly free. c.f. Bill Gates. Innovation is inherently a good thing I'd think. So you could reduce inequality by reducing government rent protection - both for the doctors of the NHS for instance, but also for that nice Mr Dyson and everyone else. A stagnant society would slowly become more and more equal. Do we want that? By the way, this article is flagged at the Guardian's Comment in Free section. Nice to see people pay attention. The other thing to look at is the cause of the inequality. In a system of perfect competition everyone would be paid the same except for the costs of things like further or Higher Education. The difference is, presumably, rent seeking of one sort or another. When this involves the Government legislating special favours for their friends this is a bad thing. However it might also include things like patents. Innovation must drive inequality because whoever invents a new gizmo gets a couple of decades competition-lite if not exactly free. c.f. Bill Gates. Innovation is inherently a good thing I’d think. So you could reduce inequality by reducing government rent protection – both for the doctors of the NHS for instance, but also for that nice Mr Dyson and everyone else. A stagnant society would slowly become more and more equal. Do we want that?

By the way, this article is flagged at the Guardian’s Comment in Free section. Nice to see people pay attention.

]]> By: dearieme http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/comment-page-1/#comment-2176 dearieme Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:54:02 +0000 http://timworstall.com/2007/11/12/ken-rogoff/#comment-2176 "Ken Rogoff": yes he should. “Ken Rogoff”: yes he should.

]]>