Welcome to Econ Talk brought to you by the Library of Economics and Liberty I'm your host Russ Roberts of George Mason University.

My guest today is Edward Glazer, the Fred and Eleanor Glimp Professor of Economics at Harvard University.

Professor Glazer's research and writings take in a wide variety of topics in political economy,

from why Americans are obese to the role of cities in economic growth.

And I'd like to talk to you today about paternalism, the idea that some people know what's best for you,

or can judge yourself interests better than you can judge yourself.

Recently Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein have argued that given recent findings in behavioral economics,

the interface between psychology and economics,

even a libertarian should favor some form of government regulation that would be paternalistic in its nature.

And you disagree, so tell us about that debate.

Well, I think the starting point for this is indeed behavioral economics,

is indeed the recognition of flaws in human cognition and the flaws in our decision making.

I think there's absolutely no question that we are highly imperfect species.

Certainly from my own personal experience, I know I screw up all the time.

But just recognizing the flaws in mankind is not a justification for state action or paternalism.

Adam Smith, 230 years ago, was well aware of the flaws in mankind.

The case of the laissez-faire, the central insight of the wealth of nations,

is the limits on government and the fact that governments interests are not necessarily aligned with those people.

And I think as one recognizes psychology, when it recognizes the flaws in mankind,

the key question is, are the errors inherent in state decision making going to be greater or lesser

than the errors involved in individual decision making?

And I think the libertarian view is that the track record for state decision making is not fantastic.

...