As it works in theory of "war" pic.twitter.com/FTQWAF7bMT
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) October 23, 2025
Coase dijo: ¡Asumamos que los costes de transacción son cero! De acuerdo: ¿ Cúal es la consecuencia?Si asumimos que los costes de transacción son cero, cuando se produzcan externalidades,el mercado alcanzará el resultado eficiente con independencia de cómo los derechos estén asignados legalmente.
En el mundo real siempre hay costes de transacción.Sin embargo, en algunas situaciones, los costes de transacción son suficientemente bajos como para que se alcance un acuerdo o transacción eficiente.
It All Depends (On Transaction Costs)
Why is it, if Coase is correct, that we still have pollution in Los Angeles? One possible answer is that the pollution is efficient—that the damage it does is less than the cost of preventing it. A more plausible answer is that much of the pollution is inefficient but that the transactions necessary to eliminate it are prevented by prohibitively high transaction costs.
Let us return to the steel mill. Suppose the mill has the right to pollute but that doing so is inefficient—pollution control is cheaper than either putting up with the pollution or changing the use of the land down wind.
Further suppose that there are a hundred landowners down wind. With only one landowner, there would be no problem—he would offer to pay the mill for the cost of the pollution control equipment, plus a little extra to sweeten the deal. But a hundred landowners face what economists call a public good problem. If ninety of them put up the money and ten do not, the ten get a free ride—no pollution and no cost for pollution control. Each landowner has an incentive to refuse to pay, figuring that his payment is unlikely to make the difference between success and failure in the attempt to bribe the steel mill to eliminate its pollution. If the attempt is going to fail even with him, then it makes no difference whether or not he contributes. If it is going to succeed even without him, then refusing to contribute gives him a free ride. Only if his contribution makes the difference does he gain by agreeing to contribute.
There are a variety of ways in which such problems may sometimes be solved, but none that can always be expected to work. The problem becomes harder the larger the number of people involved. With many millions of people living in southern California, it is hard to imagine any plausible way in which they could voluntarily raise the money to pay all pollutors to reduce their pollution.
This is one example of the sort of problem referred to under the general label of "transaction costs." Another would occur if we reversed the assumptions, making pollution (and timber) the efficient outcome but giving the landowners the right to be pollution free. If there were one landowner the steel mill could buy from him the right to pollute. With a hundred, the mill must buy permission from all of them. Any one has an incentive to be a holdout—to refuse his permission in the hope of getting paid off with a large fraction of the money the mill will save from not having to control its pollution. If too many landowners try that approach the negotiations will break down and the parties will never get to the efficient outcome.
Seen from this perspective, one way of stating Coase's insight is that the problem is not really due to externalities at all but to transaction costs. If there were externalities but no transaction costs there would be no problem, since the parties would always bargain to the efficient solution. When we observe externality problems (or other forms of market failure) in the real world, we should ask not merely where the problem comes from but what the transaction costs are that prevent it from being bargained out of existence.
🇨🇳🇳🇱 China Responds to Dutch Wartime Act Seizure of Nexperia
— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) October 22, 2025
After the Netherlands invoked the Goods Availability Act — a Cold War–era wartime law — to seize control of Nexperia, Beijing has issued a formal response.
Under the Dutch order, Nexperia’s Chinese chairman Zhang… https://t.co/49G2FJLv9y pic.twitter.com/gpsaeCpO1n
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) October 22, 2025
https://t.co/4xeBd8Rwct pic.twitter.com/SLg9cqzWF4
— Guillermo Ruiz Zapatero (@ruiz_zapatero) October 21, 2025
🌐🇭🇺🇷🇴 According to reports, serious incidents occurred at two oil refineries in the past 24 hours: a fire broke out at the MOL refinery in Százhalombatta, Hungary, on Monday evening, and an explosion rocked the Petrotel-Lukoil refinery in Romania a few hours earlier.
— 🌐geopolitics in the picture (@geogeolite) October 21, 2025
The MOL… pic.twitter.com/ckHiyzdTRO
"Con la técnica, la neutralidad espiritual llega a su expresión más simple: la nada (...)
Después de haber inaugurado la era de la técnica, la neutralidad ha alcanzado hoy la ultima etapa de su desenvolvimiento progresivo. La técnica ha dejado de ser el terreno neutro anunciado por sus profetas, y se ha puesto al servicio de la política. Por eso sería imprudente emplear la expresión "siglo de la técnica" en un sentido absoluto. La última palabra se dirá el día que sepamos qué genero de política ha logrado adueñarse de la técnica y podamos examinar las características de la antítesis "amigo-enemigo" nuevamente formulada (...)
En realidad la técnica no puede sino acentuar la paz o la guerra y ofrecer sus servicios a una y a otra; ninguno de los nombres destinados a disimular la guerra, ningún juramento pacifista será capaz de mudar las cosas. Bien claro se ve cuán fácil es sugestionar a las masas velando el sentido de las palabras (...) Ahora comprendemos bien el estado de espíritu de esa generación que en el imperio de la técnica veía la decadencia moral e intelectual (...) Una vida que solo tiene delante la muerte, no es vida, es impotencia y desesperación (...) Poner el espíritu y la vida frente a la muerte y la mecánica, es renunciar al combate, y esa táctica no puede engendrar más que los suspiros del romanticismo. La vida, en efecto, no combate contra la muerte, y el espíritu no tiene por adversario la falta de espíritu. Lucha el espíritu contra el espíritu, la vida contra la vida y la armonía aquí abajo halla su fuerza en el conocimiento integral de las cosas humanas.
(Carl Schmitt,Legalidad y legitimidad (1932); Anexo La época de la neutralidad y despolitización. traducción de José Díaz García)
"sabemos que ningún centro de atracción intelectual puede ser dominio neutro"
No comments:
Post a Comment