Comments on: Haiti and the Broken-Window Fallacy

By: stop spam plugin

stop spam plugin — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:07:18 +0000

Spam Stop…

[...]usually posts some very interesting stuff like this. If you’re having a hard time with spam links, this should help 100%[...]……

By: hyip investment

hyip investment — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 23:31:23 +0000

Haiti and the Broken-Window Fallacy | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty I was suggested this web site by my cousin. I’m not sure whether this post is written by him as nobody else know such detailed about my problem. You are incredible! Thanks! your article about Haiti and the Broken-Window Fallacy | The Freeman | Ideas On LibertyBest Regards Justin

By: Stimulus plans do not work but liberals like Brummett and Obama do not get it « HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 04:46:15 +0000

[...] businesses, and other property cannot actually be good for the economy. As economist Sandy Ikeda summed it up last year, the argument is that “paying $100 to replace a broken window somehow creates more [...]

By: Is the Road to Economic Growth Paved with Broken Windows? | The Oregon Catalyst

Mon, 05 Sep 2011 12:02:00 +0000

[...] than having the original window and spending the money on something else. But, as economist Sandy Ikeda asks, “If destruction is so good for an economy, why wait for a hurricane or a bombing raid? Why not [...]

By: Hurricane Irene as Economic Stimulus | Cato @ Liberty

Hurricane Irene as Economic Stimulus | Cato @ Liberty — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 00:41:43 +0000

By: Chicago Daily Observer » Blog Archive » "Natural disasters," not "economic stimuli"

Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:56:13 +0000

[...] economist Sandy Ikeda summed it up last year, the argument is that “paying $100 to replace a broken window somehow creates more [...]

By: Bart Simas

Bart Simas — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 20:13:55 +0000

This actually is indeed Awesome experience having writing and many because of yahoo search engine choose up me on here. I liked reading your content and added to the e book marks. The strategies you used to place up was clearly understandable. My husband also appreciated after reading this post. Let me undergo for extra earlier.

By: Daniel Shapiro

Daniel Shapiro — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:58:15 +0000

Right. Free demolition services from mother nature. Never mind loss of life and temporary loss of living standards due to poor construction, primitive economy and primative social structure due to socialism. Everyone loves capitalism when they want something done.

By: Sandy Ikeda

Sandy Ikeda — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:07:52 +0000

Stuart,

I agree, disasters CAN effect productive changes that might otherwise be very difficult to unleash, but not because it stimulates demand and spending, which is the BWF, but because it CAN clear the way for the formation of, for example, productive social networks that support “motivation and initiative.” As I mentioned in an earlier comment, I will elaborate on this in a later article. Thanks for the comment.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 18:47:46 +0000

I hope we all concede that the tradgedy in Haiti is a net asset and human capital loss for the global economy at large. However, it is not that simple. I believe the article in the WSJ was attempting to point out the practicle outcomes of this tragedy, i.e. the cohesive effort of a people united and determined to rebuild despite the tragic loss, which sometimes translate into other intangible goods, such as economic or social will to survive.
On the books it is a loss. It will and has caused the outflow of monetary resources for things we wish we were not obliged to pay for, but this event has possibley created another resource, motivation and cooperation. This human element of the economy spurs creative production that otherwise might not have occurred in Haiti. Think of this Haiti situation as being similar to a case where a family member dies and feuding siblings both in attendance at the funeral have an oppurtunity to barry the hatchet.
The point is that like it or not, tradegey has the ability to bring people together in away that simple economic priciples do not. It would be nice to belive that we could always come together and be innovative and productive under non-tragic circumstances, but it does not always work out that way as we see. A better question is what type of society have we become when tradgedy is the cheif impetus to economic productivity and voluntary cooperation.