tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4073216153962700110.post4798854910748721347..comments2023-07-15T04:51:17.650-04:00Comments on Smiling Dave's Blog of Psychology, Economics, and Gentle Sarcasm.: Caplan and Welfare EconomicsSmiling Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12898802942529057872noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4073216153962700110.post-86889517158302517122012-08-05T13:40:05.620-04:002012-08-05T13:40:05.620-04:00I hear ya.I hear ya.Smiling Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12898802942529057872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4073216153962700110.post-44493817195797308872012-08-04T17:59:32.304-04:002012-08-04T17:59:32.304-04:00Additionally, it is clear that Caplan never read R...Additionally, it is clear that Caplan never read Rothbard's withering critique of "efficiency" and "social utility" as concepts that make any sense at all. (It is included as Chapter 13, The Myth of Efficiency in Economic Controversies.)<br /><br />Basically, the fact that Rothbard cannot reject government interference based on "efficiency" and "social utility" is irrelevant, because that is not the basis of the argument he makes. His rejection of government intervention is based on his moral system, as he was also a moral philosopher.<br /><br />Rejecting government interference on the grounds of "efficiency" is a weak excuse for economists like Caplan to make value judgments without appearing to appeal to morality. Rothbard rightly exploded that sort of dishonesty repeatedly.Matt Tanoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02947545760259213385noreply@blogger.com