Everybody loves Raymond

Fresh from his own little SMOG against David Farrar, Raymond Huo ventured out again today on Red Alert to rail against the Chicago School of Economics.

Once again it has proven to be a SMOG because Raymond gets schooled on economics by the commenters.

Ben says:
February 1, 2012 at 5:41 pm
this has nothing to do with Chicago school, which would vest any consideration of liability for poor building practices in tort law – not the mess of regulation and buck-passing that you mistakenly characterise as “deregulation”. the only similarity is that there was a devolved responsibility to check buildings. turned out it was devolved to councils who were not legally liable for wrongly certifying building practices.
Poorly designed accountabilities and feedback mechanisms to signal failures perhaps, but the building regulation reforms were not a reliance on the free market and ‘caveat emptor’. Risk-based regulation is hard to get right, it it turned out it was not right.

David says:
February 1, 2012 at 5:41 pm
If they had followed the Chicago school there would have been no bailouts from taxpayers but the fat cat bankers would have carried the can, much better system.
And leaky homes may not have happened if consumers had to arrange their own inspections rather than relying on a hopeless government department and incompetent council building inspectors. House buyers may have employed their own inspectors who have decent indemnity insurance who would have been a lot more careful knowing their backsides were on the line.
Leaving things to the market makes people a lot more self reliant and careful. Just a thought.

Nick K says:
February 1, 2012 at 6:28 pm
The Building Act 1991 has 451 sections and four Schedules.

There are 21 sets of Regulations prescribed under the Act, comprising hundreds of clauses.

There is liabaility under the Fair Trading Act, the Contractual Remedies Act, the Companies Act, the Local Govenment Act and also the tort of breach of Statutory Duty, amongst many others.

What is this deregulation you are talking about Raymond?

IMpact says:
February 1, 2012 at 7:16 pm
Raymond, since you’re an expert on the Chicago School, could you please list which of Hayek, Friedman, Fama, Lucas, Posner, Becker or Fogel advocated the bailouts of banks? Which of them advocated neverending and unlimited fiscal deficits? Which of them said that it’s okay for Governments to incur such huge debts without the ability to ever pay them back?

Or have you got another leading light from the Chicago School who advocated this?

I think you’re on shaky ground on leaky homes, Raymond. The last time your party was in government, the PM denied that leaky homes existed, said it was a beat-up, and then did nothing about it.

Enhanced by Zemanta
  • Bob

    Anyone else wondering if Raymond’s New Years resolution was it give this new fangled social media thing a bit of a go? Has anyone told him that SMOG’s are not points on the board? Seems he has come back to work after the hols just bursting with great ideas! What a plonker.

  • David P

    btw, the Chicagoans don’t want an entirely “unfettered free market” as they do believe in a “strict, government-defined monetary regime”!

  • David

    How the hell did this clown become a lawyer and then a politician. His post is something you would expect from a fifth form economics student after reading their text book by Susan St John

  • Liam

    Unfortunately Friedman did support bank bailouts – sort of: http://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/article/?q=NThkZTQ0ZGFlN2FhOWRmNWE4NTY4NmU5Y2Y0NDVkMTk=

82%