A ban on bans

I read things like this one out of England:

THE Conservatives will propose banning plasma screens and other energy-guzzling electrical goods in a report to be unveiled next week.

...and I slam my head against the wall screaming "Why, Why...WHHHHHYYYYY!?"

Bans on non-deadly goods are bad economic policy.  Period. 

Consumers choose their energy usage based on what it costs them--not others.  If energy use imposes costs on others and that cost is not captured in the price of energy, then fix the price.  Banning products does nothing to fix the real problem--screwed up incentives to consume energy. 

But the proposal gets worse...

The group will also suggest scrapping Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a measure of the nation’s success in favour of a model that measures people’s happiness drawn up up by Friends of the Earth.

Under the proposals, a cap could be set on the energy use of each electrical appliance, and those exceeding limits could be banned from sale in the UK.

A new labelling requirement could be introduced to inform consumers of products’ annual energy consumption compared with other similar appliances.

And there could be a ban on electrical goods with stand-by lights which can stay on indefinitely. Some 2 per cent of Britain’s total electricity use is currently taken up by appliances left on stand-by rather than being switched off.

I'm starting a new campaign:  Ban bans.

If we take away politicians ability to ban behaviors they deem undesirable, they will be forced to find better policy options--you know, the ones I like. 

Comments

[Chapman]

Ha. Where did you find this...The Onion?

[Brian]

Funny how the party of freedom is quick to be the party of statism.

[John Whitehead]

Those are the conservatives? No wonder the Whiteheads left England.

[joshua corning]

Some how I think the days of Thatcher slamming a book by Hayek down on the at big table in the house of commons and proclaiming "This is what we believe!" are over.

[odograph]

It's pretty interesting. We all know that pricing energy with externalities is the 'best' policy, so why do bans gain such traction?

There must be some reason that humans like a messy approach.

(of course, with the ban there is a cake-and-eat-it aspect. you get to enjoy your LCD big-screen TV, and low electric rates too.)

[charles young]

Quite agree with Tim´s reaction. The proposal is as silly as trying to regulate gas consumption via CAFE, rather than through fuel taxes as in Europe. I would be surprised if it finds its way into the Conservative manifesto.

By the way, I notice that Tim seems to be reading the Sun and the Daily Mail - perhaps the two worst UK newspapers.

[Glyn]

But these are responses of politicians not economists. Strangely enough they are not constrained by economists but by voters. So a policy to increase the price of energy or a ban on plasma screens ...... mmmmmm not really a tough choice for the politician.

[joshua corning]

so why do bans gain such traction?

Segregates the voting population, which gives political cover....think smoking bans, or taxing the rich, or even better cafe standards vs gas tax.

[odograph]

Remember that we only pass CAFE standards more lax than our current CAFE sales (free market result). So that one doesn't really count.

[joshua corning]

Remember that we only pass CAFE standards more lax than our current CAFE sales (free market result).

What? No! Yes?

Market free...CAFE!!!!

*Head explodes.

Kidding aside it is not hard for me to imagine a world where CAFE standards essentially did the same amount of fuel efficiency improvements that a free market would have and yet still screwed up the market somehow.

Hell I can imagine a world where the free market improves fuel efficiency better then the the CAFE standards and lower the price of cars all at the same time, but i am a pessimist when it comes to government intervention.

Anyway I was using CAFE standards vs gas tax in an example of why some policies are politically more favorable then others...CAFE standards voters like because they are perceived to screw the dirty money grubbing automakers...voters don't like gas taxes because they see it screwing them.

Bans of products that only a small minority of voters use work the same way.