三民網路書店 / 搜尋結果

On December 5, 2004, the still-developing blogosphere took one of its biggest steps toward mainstream credibility, as Nobel Prize–winning economist Gary S. Becker and renowned jurist and legal scholar

On December 5, 2004, the still-developing blogosphere took one of its biggest steps toward mainstream credibility, as Nobel Prize–winning economist Gary S. Becker and renowned jurist and legal

From the last days of the Vietnam War to the present-day war on terrorism, this story is a moving and poignant tribute to love, marriage, family, and the men and women who serve this nation. In descri

今周刊第734期書摘推薦！【學點經濟分析，大師教你別再被新聞標題和名嘴牽著鼻子走！】請看兩大芝加哥學派學人，寫給大眾、卻又顛覆主流的「社會現象計算方法」！ 史上第一次！諾貝爾經濟學人與重量級法官的「常識問題鬥嘴鼓」！脂肪可以被抽稅嗎？一夫一妻制有效率嗎？「生育權」可以拿來交易嗎？死刑廢不廢能用經濟學算一算嗎？全球暖化怎麼用「折現率」評估它的災害與防治成本？「一條人命」值多少錢，可以試算一下嗎？

兩大芝加哥學人的經典合著呈現混亂時代人們最需要的一種思辨練習食品禁令省了多少人命錢？波斯納說：「如果透過芝加哥學派的角度針對禁令進行嚴格的分析，我們會發現那會是一道無效的命令……因此，即便有些人寧願少花一點錢，冒著罹患心臟病的風險也沒關係，但是禁令一下，卻讓他們必須多花錢才能到餐廳吃飯……」 貝克說：「攝取太多反式脂肪可能會承擔什麼風險？波斯納為這個問題提供了一個非常精彩的經濟學分析，但我相信他的

Both New Zealand and the United Kingdom challenge assumptions about how a bill of rights functions. Their parliamentary bills of rights constrain judicial review and also look to parliament to play a rights-protecting role. This arises from the requirement to inform parliament if legislative bills are not compatible with rights. But are these bills of rights operating in this proactive manner? Are governments encountering significantly stronger pressures to ensure legislation complies with rights? Are these bills of rights resulting in more reasoned deliberations in parliament about the justification of legislation from a rights perspective? Through extensive interviews with public officials and analysis of parliamentary debates where questions of compliance with rights arise (prisoner voting, parole and sentencing policy, counter-terrorism legislation, and same-sex marriage), this book argues that a serious gap exists between the promise of these bills of rights and the institutional

Both New Zealand and the United Kingdom challenge assumptions about how a bill of rights functions. Their parliamentary bills of rights constrain judicial review and also look to parliament to play a rights-protecting role. This arises from the requirement to inform parliament if legislative bills are not compatible with rights. But are these bills of rights operating in this proactive manner? Are governments encountering significantly stronger pressures to ensure legislation complies with rights? Are these bills of rights resulting in more reasoned deliberations in parliament about the justification of legislation from a rights perspective? Through extensive interviews with public officials and analysis of parliamentary debates where questions of compliance with rights arise (prisoner voting, parole and sentencing policy, counter-terrorism legislation, and same-sex marriage), this book argues that a serious gap exists between the promise of these bills of rights and the institutional