Content area
Abstract
Certain lines of reasoning commonly found in conventional policy analysis in economics are critiqued, particularly, but by no means solely, in their conservative formulations, but also to some extent in their converse, liberal formulations. It is argued that these lines of analysis either beg certain fundamental issues or selectively and presumptuously take positions on those issues and that, therefore, they are inconclusive. The lines of reasoning critiqued are the following: 1. that government regulation is excessive and therefore should be curtailed, 2. that rights can and should be determined on the basis of comparing calculations of costs and benefits of alternative rights assignments, 3. that rights can and should be determined on the basis of maximizing the value of output, 4. that efficient results are putatively desirable, 5. that resources should go to their highest valued uses, and 6. that economists can and should reach conclusive recommendations as to policy along the foregoing lines.