Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
"Do Lawyers Need Economists?" Review Of Economic Transplants: On Lawmaking For Corporations And Capital Markets, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
"Do Lawyers Need Economists?" Review Of Economic Transplants: On Lawmaking For Corporations And Capital Markets, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
Reviews
Katja Langenbucher’s outstanding book seeks to address the question of why and in what ways have lawyers been importing economic theories into a legal environment, and how has this shaped scholarly research, judicial and legislative work? Since the financial crisis, corporate or capital markets law has been the focus of attention by academia and media. Formal modelling has been used to describe how capital markets work and, later, has been criticized for its abstract assumptions. Empirical legal studies and regulatory impact assessments offered different ways forward. This excellent book presents a new approach to the risks and benefits of interdisciplinary …
Why Tax The Rich? Efficiency, Equity, And Progressive Taxation, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
Why Tax The Rich? Efficiency, Equity, And Progressive Taxation, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
Reviews
In Greek mythology, Atlas was a giant who carried the world on his shoulders. In Ayn Rand’s 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged, Atlas represents the “ prime movers”—the talented few who bear the weight of the world’s economy.1 In the novel, the prime movers go on strike against the oppressive burden of excessive regulation and taxation, leaving the world in disarray and demonstrating how indispensable they are to the rest of us (the “second handers” ).
Takings From Freund To Fischel." Review Of Regulatory Taking: Law, Economics, And Politics, By W. A. Fischel, James E. Krier
Takings From Freund To Fischel." Review Of Regulatory Taking: Law, Economics, And Politics, By W. A. Fischel, James E. Krier
Reviews
The regulatory takings problem is easy to describe but difficult to resolve. The government enacts restrictions on land use that reduce the market value of the targeted parcels by a considerable amount. The restrictions are couched in terms of the police power, but actually they might amount to a taking that requires compensation, not because any of the land has been wrested away (it hasn't), but because much of the value has. Through the police power the government gets to govern for free, whereas with takings it's pay as you go. On what does the distinction-police power or taking-depend?