排序方式: 共有2条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
2.
Patrick Gunning refuses to acknowledge the most salient arguments against the Chicago law and economics case for negligence made by Austrian economists. Because of this, he makes the same errors in his defense of Coase that permeate the Chicago paradigm. In particular, his defense of Coasean type analysis completely ignores Austrian cost theory, i.e., that all economically relevant costs are strictly subjective and therefore conceptually impossible to measure. He also fails to grasp the implications of disequilibrium market process theory for the use of any kind of least-cost-avoider rule in the economic analysis of the law. As a result, Gunning's defense of Coase suffers from the same pretense of knowledge as the analysis that he is defending. 相似文献
1