Inalienability by Legal Rules The efficiency of a transfer cannot increase by prohibiting it.
{"Image DocumentName": "Inalienability by Legal Rules", "Image ImageDescription": "The efficiency of a transfer cannot increase by prohibiting it. Is there an economic rationale for inalienability? Cooter and Ulen - Inalienability rests on conventional morality and political philosophies that stress values other than Pareto efficiency. Negative impact on those who are not party to the exchange (availability of drugs, guns, liquor, water rights) Parties to exchange are incompetent (children cannot sell property) Paternalism (the state knows best, liquor) Might it be an efficient means of controlling a dangerous product when restrictions on use are ineffective? (drugs) Might be used to redistribute wealth \u2013 restrictions on death transfers, spendthrift clauses, homesteading. Might permit transfer by superior means (blood) Inalienability may not eliminate all economic value in the asset. Owner may still have possession and use value.", "Image XResolution": "37", "Image YResolution": "37", "Image ResolutionUnit": "Pixels/Centimeter", "Image Software": "SlidePlayer", "Image YCbCrPositioning": "Centered"}