11 Comments
User's avatar
Covfefe Anon's avatar

>The net externalities of immigration [...] are positive

It's astounding how often you repeat this lie after it's been conclusively proven wrong over and over. Much like how bad policy being "justified" by market failure demonstrates that the advocates are totally unconcerned with the "market failures" in the first place, you demonstrate that your desire for "immigration" is actually about hatred for the people of the country that is unfortunate enough to have you as a citizen.

Expand full comment
Chad Nauseam's avatar

Would you be able to link to a paper disproving it?

Expand full comment
Carlo Cardilli's avatar

Why thank you @robc will get the Kindle edition for my next flight!

Expand full comment
Economic Freedom's avatar

>Apostacy hurts.

So do typos.

"A P O S T A S Y"

Expand full comment
Roko Maria's avatar

As someone who would not consider themself a libertarian, I’d say this is an interesting and persuasive argument.

When it comes to housing, immigration, and nuclear regulation, I’m with you 100%, both in policy position and in doubt that said policy would ever be implemented.

However, I’m not sold on Social Desirability Bias being the blanket cause behind all of these things. After all, doesn’t more housing, more energy, and more people to enrich the country also “sound good”? They certainly do to me, and I would want a more coherent theory on why the public has settled on these (mostly unrelated) policy preferences. After all, if you get to cherry pick your dataset, you can describe basically any position as “sounding bad”, even diametrically opposing ones.

For example: Soft on crime policies are either merciful and humane, or permissive and chaotic. Tough on crime policies are either draconian and cruel, or orderly and ensure justice. If you didn’t have access to polling, would your theory be able to predict where the public falls on this issue?

Expand full comment
Misha Valdman's avatar

I don't see how your theory is compatible with every government on earth perpetually doing everything wrong.

Expand full comment
Herbert Jacobi's avatar

The problem is people. People cheat. People are emotional. "it's for the children". Earth to be destroyed by a giant meteor. Woman and Children hardest hit. People are greedy. Markets are rational. People are not. That will always be the flaw in the free market theory. Not the theory. The people.

Expand full comment
Carlo Cardilli's avatar

Fascinating that "The net externalities of education are negative". Would you provide your favorite references for this (better curation than just asking an LLM).

Expand full comment
SolarxPvP's avatar

He wrote an entire book on it (as you’ve learned by now 😉)

Expand full comment
Carlo Cardilli's avatar

Indeed. Ask and you shall receive.

Expand full comment