Adam Smith
That dapper fellow who is our “favicon” is Adam Smith. In case you couldn’t tell.
Directors' Duties Even in Solvent Firms
In the Ribstein & Alces paper mentioned below by Keith, Ribstein & Alces write: The problem with holding that directors have duties to the “corporation” is that the corporation is composed of contracts among claimants with varying and possibly conflicting interests in the firm’s wealth. In solvent firms this is not troubling. Serving the firm’s ... Directors' Duties Even in Solvent Firms
New antitrust blawg
It’s called Antitrust Review. It’s the result of a merger between the antitrust division of Law & Society Blog and (Anti-)Trust Me, both original members of our ultra-exclusive blogroll. Here’s what Hanno Kaiser, one of the blog’s founders, and a friend and former colleague of mine, says about the blog: Antitrust Review will feature news ... New antitrust blawg
Paternalism and the iPod
I know it’s like shooting fish in a barrel to go after the tort bar and the cult of litigation masquerading as paternalism (or is it paternalism masquerading as litigation?), but this is too ridiculous to forebear. Over at Tech Law Prof Blog, Mark Giangrande reports that Apple has been hit with a lawsuit claiming ... Paternalism and the iPod
The U.S., the WTO and the absence of international law
Joel Trachtman at International Economic Law & Policy blog and Julian Ku at Opinio Juris are commenting on the role of international law in shaping US behavior, in this case with respect to compliance with WTO rulings. As Joel points out, “[t]raditional realist political science considers traditional international law ‘epiphenomenal,’ meaning that the real action ... The U.S., the WTO and the absence of international law
The costs of options expensing rules
Larry points us to a new corporate finance blog, Richard Booth’s The Quant. It looks like a great blog. The most recent post is on executive compensation–particularly on the serious problems of expensing options (and the FASB rule requiring it). Here’s a lengthy and informative excerpt (with a couple words from me following): In the ... The costs of options expensing rules
Wiki shenanigans on the Hill
Via Wonkette (“I know those words, but that [] makes no sense”), I see that congressional staffers have been, ahem, updating their bosses’ Wikipedia entries. Here’s the dispute wiki at Wikipedia, and an informative article from, of all places, Lowell, Mass. Clearly the best part is that someone thought to try to add Scott McLellan’s ... Wiki shenanigans on the Hill
On disclosure: The hydraulic theory
We know that people respond to incentives, and that behavior will adjust in response to relative changes in price. But I think it’s commonly assumed that the only relevant price change attributable to disclosure regulations is the nominal change in direct costs of compliance. Sure, we all understand that if shareholder or regulatory pressure is ... On disclosure: The hydraulic theory
Taking Maytag and Whirlpool to the cleaners
Christine blogs about the Whirlpool-Maytag merger and its antitrust problems. Law Blog has the story, as well. Both mention the American Antitrust Institute which opposes (vehemently) the merger. In fact, the AAI has never met a merger it didn’t find anticompetitive, so its opposition should be taken with a grain of salt. Then again, I’ve ... Taking Maytag and Whirlpool to the cleaners
Tom Ulen returns to the blogosphere (and it's a good thing, too)
Rumblings of the imminent emergence of the soon-to-be-formidable Law and Econ Prof Blog today. Tom Ulen is joined by Jagdeep Bhandari. Another not-to-miss read. Now I’ll never get to look at the Economist again.
Maybe Hamas ain't so bad
Prof. B. writes with pronounced skepticism of and hostility to Hamas’ recent Palestinian parliamentary victory here. He sees this as a “decisive victory by a terrorist organization hostile to both the US and Israel,” and asks why anyone thinks this would be a good thing. Well, he’s right as a banal descriptive matter (Hamas is, ... Maybe Hamas ain't so bad
Great. I'm dead, and they're talking about wheat.
Apologies for my relative absence of late: my day job, and all. I know my 3 loyal readers out there (hi Mom!) were wondering about me. Soon, I’ll post more of substance. Meantime, here’s a little chestnut for your bedtime reading pleasure, culled from an article in the Economist. I don’t regularly read the Economist. ... Great. I'm dead, and they're talking about wheat.
