To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Over the past fifteen years, there has been a growing interest in altering legal rules to redistribute wealth, with many scholars believing that neoclassical economic theory is biased against redistribution. Yet a growing number of progressive scholars are pushing back against this view. Toward an Inframarginal Revolution offers a fresh perspective on the redistribution of wealth by legal scholars who argue that the neoclassical concept of the gains from trade provides broad latitude for redistribution that will not harm efficiency. They show how policymakers can redistribute wealth via taxation, price regulation, antitrust, consumer law, and contract law by focusing on the prices at which inframarginal units of production change hands. Progressive and eye-opening, this volume uses conservative economic concepts to make a compelling case for radically redistributing wealth. This title is part of the Flip it Open Programme and may also be available open access. Check our website Cambridge Core for details.
The chapter uses Adam Smiths wealth of nations to complicate simple laissez-faire notions of economic development. Adam Smith argued that public works were crucial for economic development. Since they wouldnt always be provided by private firms there would need to be some government involvement. However, Smith argued that government waste and debt would continue to be risks of infrastructure, so he argued that infrastructure should be governed by cost-internalizing principles. Also, Adam Smith argued for natural monopoly, which would be exempt from market forces, which provided the groundwork for the idea of public utilities.
Does the First Amendment forbid reforms to save and improve newsgathering, production, and distribution? All features of the news ecosystem are currently under threat, but some interpretations suggest that the First Amendment either forbids relevant government action or has no relevance. Debates about potential reforms of the businesses and structures wreaking havoc on news and information in the United States often hit a roadblock: the assumption that the First Amendment bars government from playing a role in media systems and news industries.1 Victor Pickard calls this “First Amendment fundamentalism.”2 We can understand why internet tech platforms invoke the First Amendment against any regulation and measures requiring them to pay for news posted on their sites but gathered by others. Avoiding regulation makes their work easier and their bottom line richer. But the First Amendment is not such a bar.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.