Is it wrong to have an economic insight primarily to be a total dickweed?
So in the last few days I've become obsessed with demonstrating the superiority of unlicensed spectrum to licensed spectrum under a Coasian framework. Assuming this actually works out properly, it explains why the "unlicensed economy" is on track to outpace the "licensed economy," why innovation consistently occurs more frequently in the unlicensed bands, and why the "tragedy of the commons" that the property school has been predicting for ten years not only has failed to happen, but will never
This is actually all fairly useful. But that is not the reason I am doing it.
The reason I am doing it is because certain people in the property school have totally pissed me off too many times and I wish to demonstrate that, under their own terms, they are total losers. In policy terms, this is the equivalent of saying: "You're
not the real free market person. I'm
the real free market person. You all are a bunch of command-and-control Big Government Socialist wankers who suckle at the teat of government protected monopoly rents. Losers."
So, is it morally wrong to have a useful economic insight because one wishes to be a total immature dickweed? And, if it's wrong, I don't want to be right.