Alex Tabarrok thought they should about a week ago because the costs of warfare in terms of economics and liberty are both so great and often under-estimated.
This is an argument I find convincing, but now I’m not so sure. In recent comments about the state of the financial crises, Obama said:

“What we’ve seen the last few days is nothing less than the final verdict on an economic philosophy that has completely failed”

Scary stuff in conjunction with a blind call for hope and change. Tyler Cowen gets it right:

There is a misconception that President Bush’s years in office have been characterized by a hands-off approach to regulation. In large part, this myth stems from the rhetoric of the president and his appointees, who have emphasized the costly burdens that regulation places on business.

Hat tip to Chris Coyne at Austrian Economists.

If a hurricane hits your neighborhood dead on then your top concern is probably your house and furniture (other precious items can be taken along in an evacuation).
But when the hurricane doesn’t do much pervasive damage, the priorities and burdens of costs are rearranged. Say all that happens is your power goes out. Tossing what would otherwise be perfectly good meat into the trash is disappointing.
There’s got to be some way to harness battery power in the event of a short but significant power outage to maintain some optimal temperature to keep food from going bad. Just a week or so would make a world of difference.

I started this topic a long while ago, but admittedly failed to live up to my hopes. Well here’s another one.
You know those pills or goo you put on your dog to protect them from fleas, well apparently they also protect from mosquito bites. As I’ve been told the dogs actually emit a bit of repellent from their skin.
Why don’t they do this for people? If I could take a pill once a month and never get bitten by a mosquito I would take it, heck even if I reacted like some dogs (puked or freaked out for a little while), I’d still take it. I hate getting bit by mosquitoes.

Cracked has a list of real life vigilantes up past and present.

Lott points to a recent phenomenon where gun lovers are buying up now to avoid costly regulation later.

“We call it the Obama factor. People are very concerned that if a Democrat is elected they will see more restrictions on handguns and assault rifles.” Godell said. “I think as a result of that we have seen steady handgun sales, and there’s been an increase in the sale of assault rifles like AK-47s, as well.”

Given Lott’s More Guns Less Crime thesis, does this mean we can expect to see crime drops after elections when democrats were favored to win?

A brief but good comment by friend Art Carden.

Prison is not the answer. In a recent set of lectures given on behalf of the Institute for Humane Studies, Georgetown University legal scholar John Hasnas argued in favor of restitution as opposed to incarceration and statutory law. Hasnas argued that people are not necessarily reformed while in prisons and jails. They learn to be better criminals. They attach themselves to larger criminal networks. After some of the horrible experiences of prison–like prison rape, for example–still others are likely to become even more withdrawn and antisocial. The current system isn’t working.

Two recent publications are now available online:
1. Who’s to blame for all the heartache: A response to anti-capitalistic mentalities after Katrina

and
2. Tattoo Prohibition Behind Bars: The Case for Repeal

Tyler Cowen posts the abstract of an interesting new paper on violence in the NHL. This post reminded me of a brief paper idea I had recently and was encouraged to pursue further. The question at hand was, why do fights clear the bench in baseball but not necessarily other sports? Let’s assume the above anomaly is true, my claim is that fights in baseball typically involve the most highly valued asset of the team – high paid pitcher v. high paid batter. In this clearing the benches to involve the whole team in the fight has two rational motivations. 1) Drawing the fight into a full out brawl saves face in front of fans and the opposing team while protecting those highly valued assets. The individual fight may subside in the chaos of the brawl but no one appears to have backed down. 2) Playing the next game without the high valued player may mean a potential loss, better to involve the whole team and take some other form of dispersed penalty.
Anyone know where to hunt down good data on baseball fights or fights in other sports: hockey, basketball, rugby, etc???

As many of you have by now already heard the bad news is that the dear Sudha Shenoy, hostorian, scholar and all around wonderful person has passed away from a bout with cancer. She will be sorely missed. In reading several obits (1, 2, 3, and 4) I began to think of my favorite things Sudha:
1. Her annoyance that legal history and any institutional economics of the law are excessively Amero-centric.
2. Her annoyance that economists don’t know squat about history.
3. Her willingness to put “I, pencil” to shame with thorough production histories.
4. Her memories of hanging out with Murray and Joey, and her willingness to share them.
5. Her eagerness to meet with students and offer reading suggestions.
BTW. Bo Diddley will also be missed.

the economics of graffiti blog at http://economicsofgraffiti.blogspot.com/ is new but very interesting. I would consider most of the content sociology or anthropology but the summary paragraph hints at some incentive and cost benefit analysis.
“economists study systems. There is a system that produces graffiti and this blog is about that system. Graffiti is considered both art and vandalism, but it is a response to social pressures unlike any other type of art or vandalism…
According to Banski, who is arguably the most famous anonymous graffiti artist in the world, ‘graffiti is one of the few tools you have if you have almost nothing.'”
Hat tip to Ed Stringham via the barstool economists listserv.
Btw: I’m on at train as I’m posting this. Mobile blogging is pretty cool.