We present a dynamic rational expectations model of closed-end fund discounts that incorporates feedback effects from activist arbitrage and lifeboats. Both activist arbitrage and lifeboats distort closed-end fund prices and lead to narrower discounts. Furthermore, both activist arbitrage and lifeboats effectuate an ex post wealth transfer from managers to investors but an ex ante wealth transfer from low-ability managers to high-ability managers. On average, investor wealth is unaffected by either activist arbitrage or lifeboats because their potential benefits are factored into higher fund prices. Although lifeboats can reduce takeover attempts, they do not increase expected managerial wealth.

Edward L Glaeser of Harvard University reviews “Chicago before the Fire: An Economic History” by Louis P. Cain The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Examines the economic and business history of Chicago before the Great Fire of 1870, focusing on how the city's early growth and development determined its rise as the Midwest's dominant city.”

Half of individuals released from prison in the United States will be re-incarcerated within three years, creating an incarceration cycle that is detrimental to individuals, families, and communities. There is tremendous public interest in ending this cycle, and public policies can help or hinder the reintegration of those released from jail and prison. This review summarizes the existing empirical evidence on how to intervene with existing offenders to reduce criminal behavior and improve social welfare.

In Discrimination and Disparities, Thomas Sowell describes how economists think about the causes of disparities in socioeconomic outcomes. He cautions against government intervention to reduce disparities, noting that such interventions often have unintended consequences. In this review, I discuss the role of economic theory and empirical evidence in helping move society toward more equitable outcomes. I find far more reason to be hopeful about the role of government than Sowell does, but also argue for more experimentation and rigorous evaluation to be sure that our well-intentioned policies have their intended impacts.

Alvin Roth's Who Gets What—And Why provides a richly accessible introduction to his pioneering work on market design. Much of economics ignores the institutions that allocate goods, blithely assuming that the mythical Walrasian auctioneer will handle everything perfectly. But markets do fail and Roth details those failures, like the market for law clerks that unravels because clerks and judges commit to each other too quickly. Roth combines theory and pragmatic experience to show how the economist can engineer successful markets. He has even enabled welfare-improving trades in kidney exchanges, where law and social repugnance forbids cash payments.

The two books being reviewed are concerned with the importance of slavery in the antebellum US South for the economic development of the Northern states. One (Schermerhorn) deals primarily with Southern financial arrangements facilitating the sales of slaves and cotton. The other (Baptist) presents a broader picture of masters' treatment of slaves, as well as how the incomes of slaveowners spurred the demand for Northern industrial production. The review argues that both books overstate the importance of slavery and cotton production for US economic growth.

Fragile by Design by Charles W. Calomiris and Stephen H. Haber introduces a framework for understanding financial crises and credit abundance with politics at its center. Using the historical experiences of five nations to illustrate, the authors propose that democracies such as the United States and Canada can have stable banks and ample credit so long as populist forces do not dominate the policy agenda, and that strong autocratic states such as Mexico can also achieve stability at the cost of restricting credit. Weak autocracies, such as Brazil over much of its history, often require inflationary finance and suffer from the banking fragility that comes with it. The authors identify populist ideologies and related policy decisions (such as unit banking, deposit insurance, and the Community Reinvestment Act) as underlying causes of banking instability in the United States as typified by the recent subprime crisis. Canada, in contrast, by holding populist forces in check through calculated political choices, remains crisis-free.