At 101 years old, Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase Writes New Book, Edits New Journal(uchicago.edu)
uchicago.edu
At 101 years old, Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase Writes New Book, Edits New Journal
http://www.uchicago.edu/features/20120423_coase/
5 comments
Before one goes to apply the Coase Theorem too broadly, it is important to note its limitations. The obvious ones are named by Coase himself: liquidity constraints, poorly defined property rights, and (of course) transaction costs.
What came about much later is the Endowment Effect: that people value things they own more highly than than an identical good that they do not own. Thus initial allocation of property rights matters, even when the common constraints are satisfied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect
What came about much later is the Endowment Effect: that people value things they own more highly than than an identical good that they do not own. Thus initial allocation of property rights matters, even when the common constraints are satisfied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect
I have to look depper into this, it sounds extreamly intressting. I have never heard of it befor.
> Midway, Milton Friedman opened fire, and the bullets hit everyone but Coase.
Friedman is just fantastic at arguing, kind of like Saroman. You don't have to agree with his economics but you do have to agree to that. If Ron Paul could talk about Markets like Friedman could, we would have seen a diffrent election.
> Midway, Milton Friedman opened fire, and the bullets hit everyone but Coase.
Friedman is just fantastic at arguing, kind of like Saroman. You don't have to agree with his economics but you do have to agree to that. If Ron Paul could talk about Markets like Friedman could, we would have seen a diffrent election.
Italian Nobel Rita Levi Montalcini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rita_Levi-Montalcini) turned 103 years old a few days ago, and she is pretty active as well... maybe taking the mind active helps living a lot and well :)
The nobel prize for economics is more correctly known as the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, and has not been without its criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economi...
In Economics 100% opposed people can both get nobel prices. Somethimes two people that oppose each other get it together. Its a Social Sience you cant prove anything and its really really hard to make a conclusion for the real world. In Economics people talk about the same issues for hunderts of years, mostly the diffrents schools just develop there own theorys further.
That all said economics is a wunderful subject, it trains the mind in another was then for example programming does. Economics can help you understand things that would otherwise not be possible.
That all said economics is a wunderful subject, it trains the mind in another was then for example programming does. Economics can help you understand things that would otherwise not be possible.
It's impressive to see people working and productive as they near 100, or even surpass it. It makes we wonder how much better off we would be if we could solve a handful of difficult problems so people like Steve Jobs and Randy Pausch could have survived 2-4 more decades.
I thought John McCarthy working on his ideas for "Elephant" in his eighties was impressive. This just blows my mind.
That said, why is there an unpausable YouTube video attached to this article?
That said, why is there an unpausable YouTube video attached to this article?
The theorem states that if trade in an externality is possible and there are no transaction costs, bargaining will lead to an efficient outcome regardless of the initial allocation of property rights. In practice, obstacles to bargaining or poorly defined property rights can prevent Coasian bargaining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem
Especially for our industry, which make systems that deal with data, information, transactions, etc, I think we have to be especially appreciative of what the Coase Theorem can imply. At a fundamental level, the technology our industry develops is all about lowering transaction costs, whether we're aware of it or not. And that lowering of transaction costs means that the world does become more efficient at allocating resources, if the Coase Theorem is true.
Our professor read us a passage from Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations, part of which is cited here (edit: only a bit more detailed than the text in OP, but I still think it's a cool scene worth mentioning):
http://www.salon.com/2006/11/16/milton_friedman/
That was the night Ronald Coase came to dinner at Aaron Director’s home to defend his views of transaction costs against a skeptical Chicago department. Coase had submitted a paper arguing that simply assigning property rights and then letting market processes take their course was usually a better solution than costly government regulation. The referees were certain that something was wrong with his argument. Hence the occasion of the dinner. George Stigler later recalled, “In the course of two hours of argument the vote went from twenty against and one for Coase to twenty-one for Coase.” Midway, Milton Friedman opened fire, and the bullets hit everyone but Coase. “What an exhilarating event!” wrote Stigler. The guests said good night knowing that intellectual history had been made.
Honestly, Coase was and is a brilliant guy. My mind looks at the world in a totally different way due to his work.
edit: And I should note that although Coase refuses to take credit for developing the Coase Theorem in OP, everyone else gives him the credit. So I think he's just being modest there.