Home
 Wish I'd said that!
Stop trying to racially balance the schools
What patriotism is not
Getting political mileage
Making a living off "hate"
Some truth about slavery
Contempt for the rule of law
Rejecting the "Latest Thing"
A lost generation
It's not going to happen
Which word don't you understand?
Inspiring goals vs. real consequences
Attack by subversion
Drugging children
A world without man
Stupid regulations
Pick a country
The con games continue
The non-existent digital divide
Forced to compete
As if they were livestock
Booker T's common sense
Privacy and the presumption of guilt
Another victory for FIRE
Fraudulent diplomas
Gratitude, not guilt
Tyranny with a smile
From good intentions to corruption
Self-appointed monitors of "hate"
Get government out of the diversity business
Bulldozing property owners
Shibboleths vs. facts
The diversity fig leaf
Does diversity tolerate disagreement?
The problem isn't civil rights
Fostering more victimhood
Secession is legal
Reparations: racial power play
Ideological make-believe
Tired of the race racket
There are real group differences
The specter of data warehouses
Escape through vouchers
No principle at stake
"Resegregation" is not the government's business
The true test
Keeping blacks in check
Needed: A thicker skin
The primary problem
The underreported heinous crime
Still not closing the borders
Cashing in on GWTW
Has the man no pride?
Electioneering for me, but not for thee
Western values under assault
Stop trying to racially balance the schools
Promoting envy as "social justice"
A tool to punish men
Owned by the government
Mystic "diversity"
Supported by lies and duplicity
Fearing no one but God
Real people vs. abstract categories
Contempt for the Constitution
Staged alienation
A memorial to perpetuate victimhood
Legitimizing a myth
California's immigration woes
Still destroying the family
Inclusive secular clubs
Passing the cost on to others
Dependency plus paranoia
Doing more harm than good
A modern fad
Protecting us all from the WHAMs
Wolfing down New Yorkers' pets
Offending Hollywood
Laughing at affirmative action
Mississippi rising
Utopian aims
The Passion and its deceitful critics
Organized force endowed with legitimacy
The ongoing reparations fraud
Can you be more fair than fair?
Women as wanton killers
The crusade to nationalize land
J.P. Morgan meets the reparations crusaders
What real panic looks like
Welcome to the new conservatism
Discrimination via statistics
When blacks scold blacks
The punishment continues
What is wrong with these people?
Tone deaf and talentless
A zero-sum game
The scrupulous and the reptilian
Praise instead of rebuke
A madness in the soul
The menace of emotions
Seduction or coercion?
Giving people what they want
Farewell to the states
Put an end to eminent domain
On government interference
Rules to avoid poverty
Raking Whitey over the coals . . . again
Black Warmongers and Pseudo-conservatives
 
Printer-friendly versionView Printable Format
Contact Issues & Views
(Also enter "Subscribe" to receive free Biweekly Updates)

Passing the cost on to others

Wish I'd said that!

[Reprinted from Issues & Views September 22, 2003]

David Lucas owned shoreline property that the South Carolina government told him he couldn't develop, even though his next-door neighbors developed their property. South Carolina's regulation made his shoreline property virtually worthless. Lucas sued, and the U.S. Supreme Court forced the South Carolina government to pay him $1 million. Once the state was forced to pay Lucas $1 million, it changed its mind about the worth of keeping the shoreline undeveloped. In fact, it sold it to a developer.

South Carolina's actions demonstrate that incentives matter. Costs born by others will have less of an effect on our choices than when we bear them directly. Environmentalists love it when the government can force private citizens to bear the burden of their agenda, as opposed to requiring that government pay landowners for property losses due to one regulation or another. It's cheaper, and that means government officials will more readily cave in to environmentalists' demands.

In other words, regulations that stop a landowner from using his land because of the red-cockaded woodpecker, or prevent a farmer from tilling his land because of an endangered mouse, or prevent a homeowner from building a firebreak to protect his home produce costs that are privately borne. If government had to compensate people for regulations that reduce the value of their property, more intelligent decisions would be made. Besides, if a particular measure will benefit the public, why should its cost be borne privately?

Environmentalists go berserk whenever there's talk of drilling for the tens of billions of dollars worth of oil in Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge. Why? It doesn't cost them anything.

Here's what I predict. If we gave environmentalists Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge, you can bet your last dollar that there'd be oil drilling. Why? It would now cost them something to keep the oil in the ground. The Audubon Society owns the Rainey Preserve in Louisiana, a wildlife refuge. There's oil and natural gas on its property, and it has allowed drilling for over half a century. Not allowing drilling, in the name of saving the environment, would have cost it millions of dollars in revenue.

-- Walter Williams, syndicated columnist and Professor of Economics at George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. He is author of The State Against Blacks, (McGraw-Hill), and several anthologies of his syndicated columns, which include: Do The Right Thing: The People's Economist Speaks (Hoover), All It Takes Is Guts: A Minority View (Regnery), and More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well (Hoover). (Creators Syndicate)

Copyright © 2008 Issues & Views


Printer-friendly version
Printer-friendly version

home | printable  

Copyright © 2008 Issues & Views
All rights reserved.
Email the webmaster with comments on the site design.
Last updated: Sun May 11 11:22:03 2008 AKDT