Social Change Shots

Pictures of this summer's IHS Social Change Workshop are popping up all over the internets.
Victor Muniz-Fraticelli has a few here, which link to yet more pictures on his Flickr page.
Matt Mullins has pictures here and here, where I can be seen dominating Alina in thumbwrestling and gesturing rudely.
If you can't tell by looking, it's a good time, folks. I'm sorry I couldn't stay the whole week this year.
[Update: More here from Jose Castellano.]

Author: Will Wilkinson

Vice President for Research at the Niskanen Center

5 thoughts

  1. While agreeing with the broad thrust of the piece (there’s too much politics and not enough market in regulations) I must beg to clarify one point.
    A great deal of the regulation that frames financial markets, and especially that frame markets for complex products like derivatives and so on, are regulations that define property rights. For example, when I buy a AAA tranche of a portfolio of mortgage backed securities, what exactly have I just bought? Regulations here create markets by introducing new kinds of property. The impact of this regulatory framework was to help price assets by providing transparency (what did I buy?), contract law (what was just transacted?), and so on. Governments don’t create markets for Frozen Waffles. But they sure created the market for residential mortgage backed securities, and collateralized debt obligations!
    The problem wasn’t strictly “heavily regulated nature of our financial markets”. The problem was the state of regulations covering the organizations participating in those markets. A healthy, innovative financial market is vital to late capitalism. It is the mechanism whereby savings are recycled into investment, where financial risk is managed. What went wrong was the way the political process designed the regulations on the firms involved in the markets, and thereby diminished my property rights (I owned shares in these suckers).

  2. I’d like to see you rigorously distinguish between politically-created property rights and other property rights. The difference can’t be the constitutive nature of law or policy: I take it you don’t object to land registry systems or the common law of nuisance. So where does it lie?

Comments are closed.