IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/coecpo/v6y1988i1p69-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Markets, Morals, Property, And Other Rights: A Rejoinder To The Pastoral Letter

Author

Listed:
  • KEVIN C. SONTHEIMER

Abstract

The pastoral letter calls for a radical restructuring of the American economy. The restructuring is to be set on a foundation of economic rights, a social mortgage on privately held property, and a deference toward the small within the political system. The restructuring also is intended to avoid statist or totalitarian outcomes. The second half of the pastoral letter, containing the policy analysis and recommendations, is not consistent with the basic system for restructuring the economy contained in the first half. The practical visions of the second half of the pastoral letter do not provide for economic rights or a social mortgage. Analyzing the logic of the basic system for restructuring the economy shows that it is inconsistent with the bishops' intended goal of a non‐statist economy. The flawed logic of the basic system explains the inconsistency between the two major parts of the pastoral letter.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin C. Sontheimer, 1988. "Markets, Morals, Property, And Other Rights: A Rejoinder To The Pastoral Letter," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 6(1), pages 69-83, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:6:y:1988:i:1:p:69-83
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-7287.1988.tb00279.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7287.1988.tb00279.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1465-7287.1988.tb00279.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olson, Mancur, Jr, 1969. "The Principle of "Fiscal Equivalence": The Division of Responsibilities among Different Levels of Government," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 479-487, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John D. Donahue, 1997. "Tiebout? Or Not Tiebout? The Market Metaphor and America's Devolution Debate," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 73-81, Fall.
    2. Stephen Billings & Thomas Thibodeau, 2011. "Intrametropolitan Decentralization: Is Government Structure Capitalized in Residential Property Values?," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 416-450, May.
    3. Iain Begg, 2009. "Regulation and Supervision of Financial Intermediaries in the EU: The Aftermath of the Financial Crisis," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(5), pages 1107-1128, November.
    4. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & Marie-Laure Breuillé, 2023. "Citizen preferences and the architecture of government," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(3), pages 537-585, October.
    5. Ehtisham Ahmad, 2010. "Improving Governance in Pakistan: Changing Perspectives on Decentralisation," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 49(4), pages 283-310.
    6. Bernhard Seidel & Dieter Vesper, 1999. "Fiscal Federalism: An International Comparison," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 183, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Melle Marco C., 2014. "Eine europäische Bemessungsgrundlage für die Körperschaftsteuer? Konzeption und ordnungsökonomische Analyse / Conceptual design and constitutional economics analysis of a European tax base for corpora," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 65(1), pages 133-156, January.
    8. Hofreither, Markus F., 2007. "EU-Haushaltsreform und Agrarbudget - nationale Kofinanzierung als Lösungsansatz?," Discussion Papers DP-30-2007, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    9. Huffman, Wallace E., 1999. "Finance, Organization, and Impacts of U.S. Agricultural Research: Future Prospects," ISU General Staff Papers 199903010800001315, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Schläpfer, Felix & Baur, Ivo, 2017. "Does CAP spending reflect taxpayer preferences? An analysis of expenditures for public goods and income redistribution in relation to preference indicators," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261105, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Samuel Adams & Kingsley Agomor, 2020. "Decentralization, Partisan Politics, and National Development in Ghana," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 351-366, June.
    12. Huberto M. Ennis & Santiago M. Pinto & Alberto Porto, 2006. "Choosing a place to live and a workplace," Económica, Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, vol. 0(1-2), pages 15-51, January-D.
    13. Michael Fotos, 2015. "Vincent Ostrom’s revolutionary science of association," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 67-83, April.
    14. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, "undated". "The Role of Direct Democracy and Federalism in Local Power," IEW - Working Papers 209, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    15. Claudia N. Avellaneda, 2014. "Decentralization and Reform in Latin America: Improving Intergovernmental Relations, edited by Giorgio Brosio and Juan Pablo Jiménez," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 44(3), pages 1-10.
    16. Bruno S. Frey, 2001. "A Utopia? Government Without Territorial Monopoly," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 157(1), pages 162-175, March.
    17. Miriam Hortas-Rico & Vicente Rios, 2020. "Is there an optimal size for local governments? A spatial panel data model approach," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(7), pages 958-973, July.
    18. Faggini, Marisa & Parziale, Anna, 2011. "Fitness landscape and tax planning: NK model for fiscal federalism," MPRA Paper 33770, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Pitlik, Hans & Schmid, Gunther & Strotmann, Harald, 2001. "Bargaining Power of Smaller States in Germany's Landerfinanzausgleich 1979-90," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 109(1-2), pages 183-201, October.
    20. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, "undated". "Direct Democracy: Designing a Living Constitution," IEW - Working Papers 167, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:coecpo:v:6:y:1988:i:1:p:69-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.