I’ve written before on government attempts to stimulate entrepreneurship and innovation through subsidies, prizes, tax incentives, state-funded science parks and incubators, and similar policies. Both theory and evidence suggest that these programs are unlikely to be
business affairs and devote his time to philanthropy, formal studies and a public policy career. He achieved the philanthropic goal but not before playing a key role ... Carnegie’s entrepreneurial talents in developing new markets and technological innovation cannot be ignored, Bostaph writes, despite his support for protective
inflation is appropriate, where healthy competition — internal and external — plus innovation and automation are rampant. On the other hand, during supply shocks, such thing is that inflation targeting involves deliberately inflating as a routine policy tool for managing the economy. This is a blatant departure from a central
prosperous economy. What is this simple lesson? In successful economies, economic policy has been pragmatic, not ideological. And so it has been in the United States. From its very beginning, the United States again and again enacted policies to shift its economy onto a new growth direction. ... These redirections path, and, where needed, provided the means. And then the entrepreneurs rushed in, innovated, took risks, profited, and expanded that new direction in ways that had not
in packaging. Based on our analysis, we claim that an expansionary monetary policy may cause a decline in quality (quantity) of produced goods and services if way, the increase in money supply may have, ceteris paribus , a negative impact on innovativeness of entrepreneurs who, instead of improving the quality of products So what do sellers do? In many cases the rescue comes through technological innovation, which allows a cheaper production of the product, thus neutralizing or
with smoke and mirrors, using the fear of “new” as the only reason to prevent innovative technology from entering the market. Instead of fearing the new, their paper “ The Sharing Economy and Consumer Protection Regulation: The Case for Policy Change ,” “[e]ven well-intentioned policies must be judged against real world evidence. Markets, competition, reputational systems, and ongoing innovation often solve problems better than regulation when we give them a chance
financial crisis. As chairman, she has ably begun the process of unwinding the policies that kept the economy from sinking too far into the abyss. The USAToday prime reason for re-appointing Yellen is based on things she’s said. Not any policy change to the status quo she’s actually supported and carried through to bound by outmoded “laws” of economics and more driven by the very pragmatism and innovation it displayed to great effect in 2008-2009.
tend to be fascinated by China’s erratic economic progress and rich history of innovation, each of which have, at different times, both outpaced and lagged behind Duyvendak 1928, 275 ). This sentiment was not limited to ideology, but extended to policy as well: [ The Book of Lord Shang ] also records antimerchant measures,
on the second leg of their flight. This reduced the cost of flying. These innovations would not have occurred without deregulation. This is the beauty of the marketplace. Innovators come up with better ways to serve the public. Further, Professor Stiglitz of deregulation to work, we would need to have the European Union adopt a similar policy for US airlines in Europe. What Europe does makes no difference for people who
Winston argues that transit systems like the MTA have failed to “explore operating innovations that could improve its service and financial performance.” While private the subject. Robert Fellner is the director of transparency research at the Nevada Policy Research Institute.
What is the Mises Institute?
The Mises Institute is a non-profit organization that exists to promote teaching and research in the Austrian School of economics, individual freedom, honest history, and international peace, in the tradition of Ludwig von Mises and Murray N. Rothbard.
Non-political, non-partisan, and non-PC, we advocate a radical shift in the intellectual climate, away from statism and toward a private property order. We believe that our foundational ideas are of permanent value, and oppose all efforts at compromise, sellout, and amalgamation of these ideas with fashionable political, cultural, and social doctrines inimical to their spirit.