Robert Lawson is an Associate Professor in the Department of Finance at Auburn University. He is also a co-author of the widely-cited “Economic Freedom of the World” annual report which provides an economic freedom index for over 140 countries. He has publications in journals such as Public Choice, Cato Journal, Kyklos, Journal of Labor Research, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, and European Journal of Political Economy. He is also a member of the Mont Pelerin Society.

Last year I discussed Randy Barnett’s proposed constitutional amendment in Randy Barnett’s Proposed “Federalism Amendment” and Randy Barnett’s “Federalism Amendment”–A Counterproposal. The amendment would give a two thirds majority of the states the power to repeal any federal law or regulation.

Robert Higgs is a Senior Fellow in Political Economy at the Independent Institute and is the editor of Independent Review. He is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and is also a contributor to LewRockwell.com. Higgs has held teaching positions at University of Washington, Lafayette College, and Seattle University.

What is the current state of economic science? In two words, “not good.”

This is evident in the poor performance of the economics profession during the current financial crisis. Few economists saw it coming; once it started, its severity caught them by surprise; and now it is apparent that there is no agreement among them on how to end it.

To make this case, I will present some leading mainstream economists’ views on the crisis. This will be followed by my personal remarks.

The case against IP is not hard to make; patent and copyright (say) are artificial state-granted monopoly privileges that undercut and invade property rights. But the consequentialist and utilitarian mindset is so entrenched that even people who see the ethical problems with IP law sometimes demand that the IP opponent explain how innovation would be funded in an IP-free world. As I noted in The Creator-Endorsed Mark as an Alternative to Copyright:

It is understandable, though still harmful, when economists completely mischaracterize the policies of the Herbert Hoover Administration. But in his recent Salon piece on Sarah Palin’s new book, historian David Greenberg distorts the legacies of both Calvin Coolidge and his ill-fated successor, Hoover. To set the record straight, it’s worth pointing out exactly where Greenberg goes wrong.