10 Nov 2011
Watch Professor Robert Frank as he argues that in the next century Charles Darwin will unseat Adam Smith as the intellectual founder of economics.
Listen to the full event (audio only).
Download the video (mp4)
Watch Robert Frank on our YouTube channel
Watch Robert Frank on our Vimeo channel
If your browser is Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome: Right-click the link to the video and choose 'Save Link As'.
(Need help viewing this file?)
Listen to the full event (audio only).
Download the video (mp4)
Watch Robert Frank on our YouTube channel
Watch Robert Frank on our Vimeo channel
How to download a video
If your browser is Internet Explorer: Right-click the link to the video and choose 'Save Target As'.If your browser is Mozilla Firefox or Google Chrome: Right-click the link to the video and choose 'Save Link As'.
(Need help viewing this file?)
You are welcome to link to, download, save or distribute our audio/video files electronically. Find out more about our open access licence.
Video file hosting and streaming is provided by GroovyGecko
Share
BK - 29 Jan 2012 4:13pm
@Brandon - The fundamental is resources are scarce; allocation of resources to their most productive use benefits society. When resource allocation goes to purposes that do not support additional or future production, you have a misallocation of scarce resources. To consider the notion fully, you have to think of what alternate use of resources could be. Does leaving the excess that would have been spent in savings for future investment provide more potential net benefit? Does investing that same money in a manner that transforms inputs and adds value provide more net benefit? The argument rests on once consumption occurs, that is the end of the story -- other allocation decisions lead to more impactful use of resources and inputs overall. What Professor Frank proposes is a means to attain Pareto improvement. Professor Frank presents a very thoughtful treatment of this topic; I quite enjoyed it.
Brandon - 26 Jan 2012 1:46am
So, though I disagree with you, I was able to not only follow but admire your own skew on the market dynamics until around the 13 minute mark... That being said, your following arguements are simply baffling... for example, how the hell do you think it is economically advantageous (for the collective, not the individual) that some multimillionaire would scale back his mansion expansion to a mere million pounds from the original four!?!?!??!? That equates to (DIRECTLY) a reduction of 75% (from 4 to 1 million) of the transfer of capital from an individual to the general community!!!!!!!.................