Archive for July, 2011

The SPR Releases 30 Million Barrels of Oil Over the Next 30 Days

Sunday, July 3rd, 2011

Round up the usual suspects to say the usual self-serving things: http://www.ogj.com/index/article-display/9256985169/articles/oil-gas-journal/general-interest-2/economics-markets/20100/june-2011/us-to_release_30_million.html?cmpid=EnlDailyJune232011. It does seem to have knocked gasoline prices down a bit. Good for the overall economy, which seems to choke at $4.00/gal,  not so good for conservation efforts. But we can’t have everything both ways.

HEK

http://econpolicy.com

With All Due Respect, Dr. Hazlett…

Sunday, July 3rd, 2011

Surely you are not this ignorant.  After all, you were once the chief economist for the FCC, an independent regulatory agency. You understand that the president cannot call a regulatory agency and dictate its policy. You understand that regulatory agencies are “bipartisan” in the sense that they must contain a minority that are not in the president’s own political party. You understand that an investigation is not a lawsuit. So why did you publish this op-ed: http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3ab926bc-a2a9-11e0-83fc-00144feabdc0.html?  You may be correct that Google has no market power despite its market share, but as you point out, Google has grown by merger as well as its own innovation.  Maybe the FTC should sit on its collective hands and not investigate anything because it might stifle innovation, which is basically your argument when you agree with Mr. Munger’s contention that, “We need a simple, improvement-friendly rule that a new feature is always a permissible improvement if there is any plausible argument whatever that product users are in some way better off.” Because there is always a plausible argument that the consumer is better off no matter what an alleged monopolist might do.

But this needs to be accomplished through legislation. You know this. You are merely taking a cheap shot at the Obama Administration (and perhaps other unnamed administrations).  If your argument cannot stand on its own legs, maybe you do not believe it is very strong.

HEK

http://econpolicy.com