Simple Rules for a Complex World

Epstein’s claim is that the more complicated a society gets, the simpler its legal rules should be. He proposes a small set — self-ownership, first possession, voluntary exchange, protection against aggression, limited privilege for cases of necessity, and just compensation for takings — and then works through employment, product liability, environmental and antitrust law to argue that elaborate regulatory regimes produce worse results than these would, mostly because complexity raises the cost of knowing and following the law.

Why it’s on the list: It opens the Institutions, Property Rights, and the Law section — the normative case for what legal rules should look like, before Alchian, Demsetz and Barzel explain how property rights function in the first place.

Where I saw it: On Brendan McCord’s Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List, in the section on Institutions, Property Rights, and the Law, saved to Kyle’s “Books To Read” Apple Note. The full 211-entry transcription lives on The Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List.

Connections

• Regulation — the alternative the book argues against.
• Complexity — the condition its title turns on.
• Institutions — the frame of the section this sits in.
• The Philosopher-Entrepreneur Reading List — the list this came from.