Reviving the Invisible Hand is an uncompromising call for a global return to a classical liberal economic order, free of interference from governments and international organizations. Arguing for a revival of the invisible hand of free international trade and global capital, eminent economist Deepak Lal vigorously defends the view that statist attempts to ameliorate the impact of markets threaten global economic progress and stability. And in an unusual move, he not only defends globalization economically, but also answers the cultural and (...) moral objections of antiglobalizers. Taking a broad cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach, Lal argues that there are two groups opposed to globalization: cultural nationalists who oppose not capitalism but Westernization, and "new dirigistes" who oppose not Westernization but capitalism. In response, Lal contends that capitalism doesn't have to lead to Westernization, as the examples of Japan, China, and India show, and that "new dirigiste" complaints have more to do with the demoralization of their societies than with the capitalist instruments of prosperity. Lal bases his case on a historical account of the rise of capitalism and globalization in the first two liberal international economic orders: the nineteenth-century British, and the post-World War II American. Arguing that the "new dirigisme" is the thin edge of a wedge that could return the world to excessive economic intervention by states and international organizations, Lal does not shrink from controversial stands such as advocating the abolishment of these organizations and defending the existence of child labor in the Third World. (shrink)

Many in both developed and developing countries fear global economic integration. But developing‐country fears of volatile capital flows are unfounded, as are developed‐country fears of pauper wages due to low‐cost imports. Demands for “ethical trading” are as misplaced as the fears of Third‐World cultural nationalists that globalization will destroy their valued ways of life.

This paper provides estimates of the economic welfare effects of tobacco taxation in India, S.Africa, S.Korea, Japan and the European Union. It argues that past studies of the cost-benefits of smoking are flawed as they fail to net out Paretoirrelevant pecuniary externalities. It estimates tobacco demand for both the myopic and rational addiction models and finds the latter invariably perform better. It finds that the net welfare losses associated with current tax levels an increase over current taxation of 10% and (...) an increase of 10% a year for!0 years in all these countries, but particularly in the poorest, are large.Cet article fournit des estimations des effets des taxes sur le tabac sur le bien-être : l’Inde, l’Afrique du Sud, la Corée du Sud, le Japon et l’Union Européenne. L’article soutient que les analyses antérieures des coûts et des bénéfices de la cigarette sont erronées car elles ne tiennent pas compte des externalités pécuniaires non pertinentes dans un monde parétien. Il donne des estimations de la demande non tant pour les modèles myopes que pour ceux supposant une addiction rationnelle et constate que ces derniers donnent de meilleurs résultats. Il en ressort aussi que les pertes nettes de bien-être associées aux niveaux actuels de taxes, à une augmentation de 10% des taxes actuelles et à une augmentation annuelle de 10% des taxes sur 10 ans dans toutes les zones étudiées, mais particulièrement dans les plus pauvres d’entre elles, sont conséquentes. (shrink)