Show simple item record

dc.rights.licensehttps://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/?language=eses_AR
dc.contributor.authorBrennan, Geoffreyes_AR
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-20T17:41:01Z
dc.date.available2018-06-20T17:41:01Z
dc.date.issued2001-11
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.utdt.edu/handle/utdt/11002
dc.description.abstractThere is a sense in which this familiar classical question - who shall guard the guardians? - is the central normative question in the public choice approach to politics and to institutional design more generally. It is so because public choice theory standardly makes what many would regard as extreme assumptions about the motives of those who hold political power - namely, that holders of political power will invariably tend to exploit that power to achieve their own ends at the expense of citizens at large. The assumption is nicely described by David Hume in a sentence often quoted in public choice circles: “in assigning the powers of government and in devising the several checks and balances of the constitution, every man ought to be supposed a knave and to have no other purpose in all his action but self-interest”. [Hume ‘ Of the Independency of Parliament’ Essays Moral, Political and Literacy p117-118]es_AR
dc.format.extent32 p.es_AR
dc.format.mediumapplication/pdfes_AR
dc.languageenges_AR
dc.publisherUniversidad Torcuato Di Tella. Escuela de Derechoes_AR
dc.relation.ispartofRevista Argentina de Teoría Jurídica. Vol. 3, n. 1, (nov. 2001). ISSN: 1851-684Xes_AR
dc.relation.hasversionVersión en español aquí: https://repositorio.utdt.edu/handle/utdt/6291es_AR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccesses_AR
dc.subjectEleccion de una ocupaciónes_AR
dc.subjectPolíticaes_AR
dc.titleTrust, adjudication and the quis custodiet problemes_AR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees_AR
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_AR


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record