I aim in this paper to provide a defense of one way to look at what should be regulated in the marketplace. In particular, I discuss what should be tolerated and argue against corporate welfare. I begin by endorsing John Stuart Mill’s harm principle as a normative principle of toleration. I label as “market libertarianism” the strict commitment to the harm principle when considering the regulatory structure of markets and juxtapose this concept against promotion-ism, the view that endorses government interference to promote business interests. I next discuss the widespread use of promotionist policies, arguing against them and instead for market libertarianism. I also consider critiques of my view, recognizing that one of my responses may leave some thinking the paper is a reductio of the market libertarian view because of the slow-growth state it endorses. Others will recognize it as a view promoted by some of the U.S. founding fathers and find it attractive in its own right.

Keep Reading The Harm Principle and Corporate Welfare (or Market Libertarianism vs. Promotionism)