D60 - Welfare Economics: GeneralNávrat zpět

The paper synthesizes the current literature regarding information aggregation, voter compe-tence, voting paradox and behavioral economics in order to answer the question whether the phenomenon of "wisdom of the crowds" can be reasonably relied upon during a referendum. Review of the 'wisdom of the crowds' research reveals two key assumptions: voter competence and voter independence. Although direct testing of the actual fulfillment of these assumptions in a real-world setting is not possible, both empirical literature on voting behavior and rational choice theory provide ample ground for skepticism in this regard. Low level of knowledge together with unmitigated influence of systematic biases is expected to dominate the actual voting behavior. Affect heuristic is used as an example to illustrate this point. The paper concludes that referendum does not seem to be a reliable way to revealing preferences regarding various social issues.

This is the reaction on the article of Václav Klusoň "Come-Backs of Dr. Bernard Mandeville: Virtuous Knaves in Economic Transformation". I put in contrast economic thinking of B. Mandeville and A. Smith and argue that both Smith's social and moral philosophy and his economic thought is more relevant for our present time. Smith's system of natural liberty - free trade and free enterprise - brings the invisible hand of the markets to work and transform self-interests of individuals into social benefits. I doubt that knaves were becoming virtuous in the process of transformation and privatization. Rather it is the other way around: virtuous men are becoming knaves in our present social, political and economic system of excessive taxation and regulations. The state is so much involved in bureaucratic, regulative and redistributive activities that it fails to function as the guardian of law and order.

The author undertakes in his essay a risky experiment as he tries to look at the present-time-economic-transformations in the view of the great thinker of 18th century, Dr. Bernard Mandeville, who famed by his Fable of the Bees, or Private Vices and Public Benefits. The philosophy of Mandeville, as is well known, influenced besides others, F. A. Hayek and J. M. Keynes, the former by ascribing Mandeville the primacy of the idea of spontaneity in evolution and the latter by assesing luxury in promoting the spending. In the course of economic reforms the truthfullnes of the so-called Mandevill paradox has been widely afirmed; knaves were becoming virtuous and property conferred respect and authority upon the "nouveau riche".

Macroeconomic policy is often evaluated solely on the basis of empirical evidence, such as observing the behavior of macroaggregates. This paper argues that this approach bears a shortcoming: "improvement" of macroaggregates can be socially undesirable under certain circumstances. Thus the sole exploration of macroaggregates is not sufficient to evaluate the macroeconomic policy -axiomatic economic theory must be used as well to determine whether the outcomes of macroeconomic policy are beneficial to society or not. The paper first offers a precise definition of a social welfare function (based as much as possible on microfoundations). Then it considers the possibility that macroaggregates might not always correlate with society's welfare. Some illustrations are covered too.