Is There a Free-Market Economist in the House?
Klein, D. & Stern, C. (2007). ”Is There a Free-Market Economist in the House?”American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 66(2): 309-334.
Klein, D. & Stern, C. (2007). ”Is There a Free-Market Economist in the House?”American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 66(2): 309-334.
People often suppose or imply that free-market economists constitute a significant portion of all economists. We surveyed American Economic Association members and asked their views on 18 specific forms of government activism. We find that about 8 percent of AEA members can be considered supporters of free-market principles, and that less than 3 percent may be called strong supporters. The data are broken down by voting behavior (Democratic or Republican). Even the average Republican AEA member is “middle-of-the-road,” not free-market. We offer several possible explanations of the apparent difference between actual and attributed views.
Klein, D. och Stern, C.
2007
2024
Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue: Freedom is something We Do Together. Lexington Books.
Most sociologists lean left. In surveys and voter-registration studies, the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in American sociology ranges between 59 to 1 and 19.5 to 1 (Klein and Stern 2009; see also Klein and Stern 2006; Duarte et al. 2014). One survey reports more self-identified Marxists (25.5 percent) than self-identified Republicans (5.5 percent) in sociology (Gross and Simmons 2007), and another finds that more sociologists are comfortable with the prospect of working with a Communist colleague than a Republican or a hard-core Christian (Yancey 2011).
More disputed is whether the near monopoly of the left is problematic. Most people would agree that ideological monopoly is a problem if the one-sidedness 1) creates a culture where ideological beliefs are treated as self-evidently true, 2) stunts theorizing and understanding by shunting research into certain ideas or topics, or 3) leads researchers to ignore inconvenient knowledge or plausible alternative explanations.
In this chapter, I argue that all three problems surface in the sociological study of gender differences in the labor market (henceforth sometimes referred to as gender sociology). I also argue that the problems emanate from the particular definition of equality embraced by the left, and thus that the two are causally related to one another and greatly overlap.
2024
Lexington Books.
The motivation for Sociology and Classical Liberalism in Dialogue: Freedom is Something We Do Together is based on two observations: first, sociology as a field is populated with scholars on the left and second, (few but still) classical liberals and libertarian scholars are found in neighboring social science fields, such as economics, political science, and political philosophy. Can scholarship benefit if sociology and classical liberal ideas are in dialogue? To answer the question, the book gathers sociologists, criminologists, demographers, and political scientists that care about classical liberal ideas, or are willing to engage their sociological thinking with classical liberal ideas. Not all authors would identify themselves as classical liberals. These contributors discuss sociological topics through the lens of classical liberalism, asking how issues such as class, gender, or race relations can be viewed with a different perspective. Chapters also delve into the intersection of sociology and classical liberalism, exploring where viewpoints conflict and where they align.
2023
Ratio.
Liberaliseringen av tjänster inom EU har tappat fart. Jämfört med den inre marknaden för varor har utvecklingen av handeln med tjänster hållits tillbaka av byråkrati och krångel, vilket resulterar i långsammare tillväxt, lägre sysselsättning och bristfällig konkurrenskraft. Hindren för handel med tjänster präglas av lika stor mångfald som tjänsterna själva.
Genom att kombinera olika index, presenterar denna rapport en övergripande bild av regleringsbaserade hinder. Enligt OECD-data finns det specifika sektorer (som juridiska, distributions- och järnvägsfrakttransporttjänster) där reformer skulle kunna genomföras till låg kostnad. Men byråkrati och administrativa hinder utmanar alla typer av företag inom EU. Mer än 90 procent av EU:s BNP kommer från länder som rankas lägre än 20 i Världsbankens Doing Business-bedömning från 2020. De över 5 700 reglerade yrkena inom EU är ett exempel på ett område i behov av reformer. Cirka 140 icke-sjukvårdsrelaterade yrken regleras endast i ett EU-land (som exempelvis blomsterhandlare i Luxemburg och vinprovare i Slovenien), vilket indikerar att regleringsbehovet är tämligen svagt eller obefintligt. Det finns också märkliga regionala skillnader i regleringen av yrken inom länder (särskilt i Belgien).
De många reglerade yrkena hindrar innebär ett sänke för potentialen i den inre marknaden och skulle kunna avvecklas helt eller harmoniseras med lite politisk vilja. Om endast yrken som är gemensamma för ett rimligt stort antal EU-länder vore föremål för reglering skulle listan över reglerade yrken kortas dramatiskt.
Den här rapporten drar slutsatsen att kostnaden för passivitet när det gäller liberalisering av den inre marknaden för tjänster är hög och riskerar skada EU:s konkurrenskraft.