4 thoughts on “Debate: Nudge economics – can paternalism ever be libertarian?”

  1. Posted 15/01/2019 at 11:59 | Permalink

    Here is an excellent example of how the State can use its coercive power to steer the choices that individuals and businesses make, which best serves the interests of citizens and communities.

    As a former real estate businessman and non-politician, President Trump may very well be having a hard time managing the federal Government enterprise, but he is a quick learner when it comes to dealing with the business community.

    As we have already seen on several occasions, Trump’s strategy for big business is to create uncertainty in the minds of corporations, so that they are provoked into doing things they would not otherwise do, like employ American workers, for instance – because, the one thing that businesses don’t like is uncertainty!

    He is using Twitter, his favoured medium for communication, to reach out to not only his own band of hard-core supporters, but whoever is listening to what he has got to say. In no more than 280 characters, he can make the Share Price of any publicly quoted company plunge overnight with a critical comment!

    In so doing, Trump is using a new weapon in the hands of the governing elite – Government by Coercion. It is nothing but threat of use of the big stick, skilfully articulated.

    And the best part is that, this type of Government intervention in the market does not cost the American taxpayer a single penny to make things happen, to satisfy the key objectives and priorities for his presidency – most notably, the America First agenda.

    It won’t be long before Governments around the world realise the value of this powerful weapon and begin to use it to force businesses to change their behaviour entirely of their own free will, for the better.

  2. Posted 16/01/2019 at 22:59 | Permalink

    Try a different label; how about Libertarian Maternalism?

  3. Posted 21/01/2019 at 10:28 | Permalink

    “British smokers already subsidise non-smokers heavily”

    I have heard this claim many times before. In fact, various studies tend to disagree and it is remarkably difficult to take all factors into account when trying to work out whether smokers subsidise non-smokers or vice versa.

  4. Posted 26/01/2019 at 20:32 | Permalink

    Sounds like more “free market” thinking which has more to do with de-regulating business than it does in promoting great freedom for the benefit of humankind.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published.