Comments on: The Hazards of "Libertarian Paternalism" and Political "Choice Architecture" http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/ The Sweet Release of Reason Tue, 22 May 2012 20:28:45 +0000 hourly 1 By: We’re Terribly Czarry | Think Tank West http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13376 We’re Terribly Czarry | Think Tank West Fri, 19 Feb 2010 01:22:28 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13376 [...] it seems Glenn Beck is out to do their work for them. Say what you will about the tenets of “libertarian paternalism,” but at least it’s an ethos that would demand a far lighter touch on markets than the [...] [...] it seems Glenn Beck is out to do their work for them. Say what you will about the tenets of “libertarian paternalism,” but at least it’s an ethos that would demand a far lighter touch on markets than the [...]

]]> By: medical_malpractice_attorney http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13377 medical_malpractice_attorney Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:02:10 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13377 This is so interested! Where can I find more like this? This is so interested! Where can I find more like this?

]]> By: medical_malpractice_attorney http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13375 medical_malpractice_attorney Wed, 30 Sep 2009 07:02:10 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13375 This is so interested! Where can I find more like this? This is so interested! Where can I find more like this?

]]> By: classical music http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13374 classical music Tue, 16 Jun 2009 06:01:30 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13374 There are so many talented architecture now a days, creating all those pretty architectural buildings and establishments. Even though the designs are attractive they must be sure that this buildings can last for a long time. There are so many talented architecture now a days, creating all those pretty architectural buildings and establishments. Even though the designs are attractive they must be sure that this buildings can last for a long time.

]]> By: Dining Room http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13373 Dining Room Wed, 03 Jun 2009 08:42:34 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13373 well design of restaurants, schools and hotels really matters.. But what really matter is their service, facilities and how good their furniture's are.. In a restaurant smoking shouldn't be permitted.. well design of restaurants, schools and hotels really matters.. But what really matter is their service, facilities and how good their furniture's are.. In a restaurant smoking shouldn't be permitted..

]]> By: Daniel P Bell http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13372 Daniel P Bell Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:29:53 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13372 460080 460080

]]> By: Julie A Frazier http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13371 Julie A Frazier Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:13:14 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13371 god blesss your blog :) god blesss your blog :)

]]> By: sandra0493 http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13370 sandra0493 Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:49:10 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13370 great article!, grats for u site :) great article!, grats for u site :)

]]> By: Cass Sunstein, OIRA, and nudging « Knowledge Problem http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13369 Cass Sunstein, OIRA, and nudging « Knowledge Problem Tue, 13 Jan 2009 15:44:06 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13369 [...] for a person than another outcome. This is old territory that has been covered elsewhere, including this April post from Will Wilkinson, so I will stop here, except for one observation: just because we face cognitive limitations to [...] [...] for a person than another outcome. This is old territory that has been covered elsewhere, including this April post from Will Wilkinson, so I will stop here, except for one observation: just because we face cognitive limitations to [...]

]]> By: David Friedman http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13368 David Friedman Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:50:23 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13368 A number of people in blog discussions raised the question of just how libertarian, in several respects, libertarian paternalism is. I don't know Thaler, but Cass Sunstein is an ex-colleague, so I asked him--both about the freedom to choose of private choice architects and about rolling back current non-libertarian paternalist policies. A summary of his response, written by me then amended by him: Yes, private choice architects should have freedom of choice. Some, but not necessarily all, current paternalist measures should be rolled back; in particular the book explicitly supports school vouchers and freedom of contract to allow doctors and patients to contract around medical malpractice liability. My conclusion is that although Cass is not currently a hard core libertarian, his position is libertarian in the weaker sense that adds up to 10-15% of the electorate--he wants less (but not necessarily zero) government compulsion in both economic and social matters than now exists. A number of people in blog discussions raised the question of just how libertarian, in several respects, libertarian paternalism is. I don’t know Thaler, but Cass Sunstein is an ex-colleague, so I asked him–both about the freedom to choose of private choice architects and about rolling back current non-libertarian paternalist policies. A summary of his response, written by me then amended by him:

Yes, private choice architects should have freedom of choice. Some, but not necessarily all, current paternalist measures should be rolled back; in particular the book explicitly supports school vouchers and freedom of contract to allow doctors and patients to contract around medical malpractice liability.

My conclusion is that although Cass is not currently a hard core libertarian, his position is libertarian in the weaker sense that adds up to 10-15% of the electorate–he wants less (but not necessarily zero) government compulsion in both economic and social matters than now exists.

]]> By: David Friedman http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13386 David Friedman Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:50:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13386 A number of people in blog discussions raised the question of just how libertarian, in several respects, libertarian paternalism is. I don't know Thaler, but Cass Sunstein is an ex-colleague, so I asked him--both about the freedom to choose of private choice architects and about rolling back current non-libertarian paternalist policies. A summary of his response, written by me then amended by him: Yes, private choice architects should have freedom of choice. Some, but not necessarily all, current paternalist measures should be rolled back; in particular the book explicitly supports school vouchers and freedom of contract to allow doctors and patients to contract around medical malpractice liability. My conclusion is that although Cass is not currently a hard core libertarian, his position is libertarian in the weaker sense that adds up to 10-15% of the electorate--he wants less (but not necessarily zero) government compulsion in both economic and social matters than now exists. A number of people in blog discussions raised the question of just how libertarian, in several respects, libertarian paternalism is. I don’t know Thaler, but Cass Sunstein is an ex-colleague, so I asked him–both about the freedom to choose of private choice architects and about rolling back current non-libertarian paternalist policies. A summary of his response, written by me then amended by him:

Yes, private choice architects should have freedom of choice. Some, but not necessarily all, current paternalist measures should be rolled back; in particular the book explicitly supports school vouchers and freedom of contract to allow doctors and patients to contract around medical malpractice liability.

My conclusion is that although Cass is not currently a hard core libertarian, his position is libertarian in the weaker sense that adds up to 10-15% of the electorate–he wants less (but not necessarily zero) government compulsion in both economic and social matters than now exists.

]]> By: Revisiting Libertarian Paternalism « The Ego Chronicles http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13367 Revisiting Libertarian Paternalism « The Ego Chronicles Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:11:11 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13367 [...] Will Wilkinson / The Fly Bottle » Blog Archive » The Hazards of “Libertarian Paternalism” and ... The thing is, we often rightly resent their attempts to manipulate us, but at least we are more or less in control of our exposure to such people. But when choice architecture is implemented politically, we cannot opt out of these attempts at manipulation, attempts which may or may not be benign. That’s a big problem because political choice architecture may do a great deal to shape us, even if, in its “libertarian paternalist” incarnation, it makes a show of leaving the ultimate choice open to individuals. For example, I would object if President John McCain implemented a policy of opt-out national service because such a policy would communicate all-too-clearly that individuals need some kind of special justification or rationale not to serve the state. The default rule itself contains meaningful content. If allowed to stand, such a policy could shape norms and individual preferences in a direction antagonistic to the value of autonomy. Soon enough we might find ourselves asking, “Why should you be able to opt out at all?” The paternalistic nudge may “leave the choice open” but accepting the legitimacy of certain nudges may imperil liberty. [...] [...] Will Wilkinson / The Fly Bottle » Blog Archive » The Hazards of “Libertarian Paternalism” and … The thing is, we often rightly resent their attempts to manipulate us, but at least we are more or less in control of our exposure to such people. But when choice architecture is implemented politically, we cannot opt out of these attempts at manipulation, attempts which may or may not be benign. That’s a big problem because political choice architecture may do a great deal to shape us, even if, in its “libertarian paternalist” incarnation, it makes a show of leaving the ultimate choice open to individuals. For example, I would object if President John McCain implemented a policy of opt-out national service because such a policy would communicate all-too-clearly that individuals need some kind of special justification or rationale not to serve the state. The default rule itself contains meaningful content. If allowed to stand, such a policy could shape norms and individual preferences in a direction antagonistic to the value of autonomy. Soon enough we might find ourselves asking, “Why should you be able to opt out at all?” The paternalistic nudge may “leave the choice open” but accepting the legitimacy of certain nudges may imperil liberty. [...]

]]> By: Peter Kaplan http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13366 Peter Kaplan Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:09:02 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13366 Sorry, to clarify: The phrase "toward personal responsibility" in my post above is not meant to read "away from collective responsibility," but rather "away from blame/victim mentality" (or in practical terms, "away from legalisticity"). I do not believe that the social safety net is the essential cause for personal irresponsibility in this country, and I would not accept such a position as part of an authentically deep/shallow choice architecture. Sorry, to clarify:
The phrase “toward personal responsibility” in my post above is not meant to read “away from collective responsibility,” but rather “away from blame/victim mentality” (or in practical terms, “away from legalisticity”). I do not believe that the social safety net is the essential cause for personal irresponsibility in this country, and I would not accept such a position as part of an authentically deep/shallow choice architecture.

]]> By: Peter Kaplan http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13387 Peter Kaplan Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:09:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13387 Sorry, to clarify: The phrase "toward personal responsibility" in my post above is not meant to read "away from collective responsibility," but rather "away from blame/victim mentality" (or in practical terms, "away from legalisticity"). I do not believe that the social safety net is the essential cause for personal irresponsibility in this country, and I would not accept such a position as part of an authentically deep/shallow choice architecture. Sorry, to clarify:
The phrase “toward personal responsibility” in my post above is not meant to read “away from collective responsibility,” but rather “away from blame/victim mentality” (or in practical terms, “away from legalisticity”). I do not believe that the social safety net is the essential cause for personal irresponsibility in this country, and I would not accept such a position as part of an authentically deep/shallow choice architecture.

]]> By: Peter Kaplan http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/04/02/the-hazards-of-libertarian-paternalism-and-political-choice-architecture/#comment-13365 Peter Kaplan Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:59:47 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1376#comment-13365 My personal advocacy of paternalistic libertarianism is more in product design and space design, rather than in institutional sociology & socioeconomics. That said, I do agree that government will always be irresponsible in its political nudges to the left or to the right, and therefore should not be further empowered along these lines, even in the name of so-called liberty or even true liberty. (See PATRIOT ACT.) However, there does exist the practical possibility of a self-interested government that would use nudges not for left/right political purposes but rather to enhance the civility or livability of society in a way that would be essentially unobjectionable. By this I mean that the nudged choices would serve every citizen's interest as well as the government's interest, in both the long term and short term, without harmful externalities, all while strengthening the constitution. An example might be a campaign of nudged choice toward personal responsibility. In sum: I find it inadequate, and in fact counterproductive, to restrict to a left/right axis the discussion of the shortcomings of paternalistic libertarianism as a political tool. Improving society and livability are not essentially left/right propositions, they are shallow/deep propositions, and such are precisely the forte of choice architecture. My personal advocacy of paternalistic libertarianism is more in product design and space design, rather than in institutional sociology & socioeconomics. That said, I do agree that government will always be irresponsible in its political nudges to the left or to the right, and therefore should not be further empowered along these lines, even in the name of so-called liberty or even true liberty. (See PATRIOT ACT.)

However, there does exist the practical possibility of a self-interested government that would use nudges not for left/right political purposes but rather to enhance the civility or livability of society in a way that would be essentially unobjectionable. By this I mean that the nudged choices would serve every citizen’s interest as well as the government’s interest, in both the long term and short term, without harmful externalities, all while strengthening the constitution. An example might be a campaign of nudged choice toward personal responsibility.

In sum: I find it inadequate, and in fact counterproductive, to restrict to a left/right axis the discussion of the shortcomings of paternalistic libertarianism as a political tool. Improving society and livability are not essentially left/right propositions, they are shallow/deep propositions, and such are precisely the forte of choice architecture.

]]>