Daniel Carpenter: evaluation

Transcript context

…If we consider regulation in general at the state and local level, should we think of that as simply a one-way ratchet that basically just goes up over time, and hardly ever goes down, and eventually gets to be too complex, too cumbersome, too restrictive? No, I think that narrative is pretty easily falsified in the United States, as well as some other countries — definitely, as a one-way ratchet. If we’re going to talk about pure monotonicity, take into account first that the degree to which we see price regulation — which was exactly what the Chicago School and other capture theorists were so concerned about so long ago — we’ve seen a whole range of areas where the government regulates prices far less. Governments, I should say, regulate prices far less. We see far less regulation of antitrust M&A than we used to. I actually think that’s a problem. I’m happy to say that I think the case against price regulation, especially micro-level regulation of prices, is generally a strong one, the case against price regulation. We’ve seen a fair degree of deregulation in environmental spaces. I would argue, depending on which part of the FDA you want to look at, even in medicines approval and things like that, we’ve seen some deregulation. This is state and local level. If you look at, say, freedom to build, many more cities are putting restrictions on building than are liberalizing. You might expect, over time, the entire Southeast will become a bit like, say, the California cities or Cambridge, Mass., for that matter, where they just don’t want that much new to be built. Isn’t that a one-way street, in essence?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.