You wouldn't think there was a need for a Coase Theorem, really.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I'm no enthusiast for the Coase Theorem. I don't like it, but it's widely used.
I tend to regard the Coase theorem as a stepping stone on the way to an analysis of an economy with positive transaction costs.
I don't need much coaxing.
One cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem.
The pursuit of pretty formulas and neat theorems can no doubt quickly degenerate into a silly vice, but so can the quest for austere generalities which are so very general indeed that they are incapable of application to any particular.
To insure the adoration of a theorem for any length of time, faith is not enough, a police force is needed as well.
The Limbaugh Theorem was not about me giving me credit for something. It was simply sharing with you when the light went off.
Whether that coherence obtains universally is a question that need not be answered here since only those parts where the coherence has actually been found become part of Science.
I think I have met nearly all the Laureates in Economics. Among the few I haven't met, I suppose I'd most like to meet Ronald Coase because of his legendary power to persuade his colleagues of the validity of the Coase Theorem.
If God has made the world a perfect mechanism, He has at least conceded so much to our imperfect intellect that in order to predict little parts of it, we need not solve innumerable differential equations, but can use dice with fair success.
No opposing quotes found.