Once firms had to pay to pollute, they became incredibly inventive at figuring out cheaper ways to eliminate their SO2 emissions.

As the great naturalist Charles Darwin saw clearly, individual and collective interests often coincide, as in the invisible hand narrative. But he also saw that in many other cases, interests at the two levels are squarely in conflict, and that in those cases, individual interests generally trump. That simple observation suggests that market failure is often the result not of insufficient competition (the traditional charge from social critics on the Left), but of the very logic of competition itself.

Commercial roadways in communities that lack zoning laws, for example, are often an aesthetic nightmare not because of insufficient competition, and not because merchants are stupid or lack taste. Rather, the problem is that any individual merchant's sign won't be noticed unless it's bigger and more garish than those of rival merchants.

In the long run, greater investment would mean greater productivity and income growth.

In almost every instance, air and water quality goals were met more cheaply and quickly when we taxed pollution than when we tried to regulate it directly.

Ever since the Great Depression, economists have known that demand shortages tend to persist in the wake of severe financial crises like the ones that happened in 1929 and 2008.

Once firms had to pay to pollute, they became incredibly inventive at figuring out cheaper ways to eliminate their SO2 emissions.