[cross-posted at Palmer Periscope] I’ve already debunked several Palmer distortions about Hoppe. In Outcome of the Hoppe Case, Palmer repeats the one about “involuntary unemployment” (which I had already explained); and also repeats his uniformed Coase comments, to the effect that Hoppe, Block and Rothbard don’t understand Coase.
I have already posted (in Cato, Lessig and Intellectual Property, and Hoppe on Coase) links to several articles by Hoppe, Block, and others that clearly backup their interpretation of Coase. Palmer does not even attempt to address their arguments, but just asserts they are wrong. They are not; the wealth-maximization school does indeed favor judicially allocating property rights based on wealth-maximization considerations, and this has the implications Hoppe et al. ascribe to it.
