Starve all the lawyers: four theories of the just price

References

• Acton, H. B. 1993. The Morals of Markets and Related Essays. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Aquinas, T. Summa Theologiae.1981. Westminster, MD: Christian Classics.
   Google Scholar
• Atiyah. P. S. 1988. Essays on Contract. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Atiyah. P. S. 1979. The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barry, B. 2008. Why Social Justice Matters. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Calabresi, G., and A. D. Melamed. 1972. “Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral.” Harvard Law Review 85(6): 1089–1128. doi:10.2307/1340059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicero, M. T. 2009. De Legibus (The Laws). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cicero, M. T. 2009. Pro Roscio Amerino (For Roscius of Ameria) in Defence Speeches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Commons, J. 1893. The Distribution of Wealth. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Conly, S. 2013. Against Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elegido, J. M. 2015. “The Just Price as the Price Obtainable in an Open Market.” Journal of Business Ethics 130 (3): 557–572. doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2240-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elegido, J. M. 2009. “The Just Price: Three Insights from the Salamanca School.” Journal of Business Ethics 90 (1): 29–46. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-0024-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. 2011. Design for Liberty. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. doi:10.1086/ahr/109.3.991.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. 2003. Skepticism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R. 1975. “Unconscionability: A Critical Reappraisal.” Journal of Law & Economics 18 (2): 293–315. doi:10.1086/466814.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fried, C. (2009). Contract as Promise. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, D. 1980. “In Defense of Thomas Aquinas and the Just Price.” History of Political Economy 12 (2): 234–242. doi:10.1215/00182702-12-2-234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. 2002. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grotius, H. 1625 (2005). De Jure Belli ac Pacis (On the Rights of War and Peace). Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, H. L. A. 1961. The Concept of Law. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. 2013. Law, Legislation and Liberty. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hayek, F. 1980. Individualism and Economic Order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heath, J. 2005. “Rawls on Global Distributive Justice: A Defense.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 31: 193–226. doi:10.1080/00455091.2005.10716854.
   Google Scholar
• Hobbes, T. 1651. Leviathan. (2002) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, O. W., Jr. 1881. The Common Law. Boston: Little, Brown, and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Koehn, D., and B. Wilbratte. 2012. “A Defense of a Thomistic Concept of the Just Price.” Business Ethics Quarterly 22 (3): 501–526. doi:10.5840/beq201222332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langholm, O. 2006a. The Legacy of Scholasticism in Economic Thought: Antecedents of Choice and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Langholm, O. 2006b. “Monopoly and Market Irregularities in Medieval Economic Thought: Traditions and Texts to A.D. 1500.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 28 (4): 395–411. doi:10.1017/S105383720000938X.
   Google Scholar
• Langholm, O. 1982. “Economic Freedom in Scholastic Thought.” History of Political Economy 14 (2): 260–283. doi:10.1215/00182702-14-2-260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mises, L.von. 1962. The Free and Prosperous Commonwealth. Princeton: D.V. Nostrand.
   Google Scholar
• Melkevik, Å. 2017a. “No Malibu Surfer Left Behind: Three Tales About Market Coercion.” Business Ethics Quarterly 27 (3): 335–351. doi:10.1017/beq.2017.12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melkevik, Å. 2017b. “The Fictitious Liberal Divide: Economic Rights Are Not Basic.” Erasmus Journal of Philosophy and Economics 10 (2): 1–23. doi:10.23941/ejpe.v10i2.287.
   Google Scholar
• Monsalve, F. 2014. Scholastic Just Price Versus Current Market Price: Is It Merely a Matter of Labelling? European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 21 (1): 4–20. doi:10.1080/09672567.2012.683019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholas, B. 1962. An Introduction to Roman Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Rödl, F. 2013. “Contractual Freedom, Contractual Justice, and Contract Law (Theory).” Law and Contemporary Problems 76 (2): 57–70.
   Google Scholar
• Roover. R. de. 1958. “The Concept of the Just Price: Theory and Economic Policy.” Journal of Economic History 18 (4): 418–434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothbard, M. 2006. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Vol. I. Economic Thought Before Adam Smith. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Sandel, M. 2012. What Money Can’t Buy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
   Google Scholar
• Simons, H. 1948. Economic Policy for a Free Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. 2008. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. 1853. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. London: Henry G. Bohn.
   Google Scholar
• Sturn, R. 2017. “Agency, Exchange, and Power in Scholastic Thought.” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 24 (4): 640–669. doi:10.1080/09672567.2017.1338393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacitus, C. 2008. Annales (The Annals). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasi, J. 2012. Free Market Fairness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zwolinski, M. 2008. “The Ethics of Price Gouging.” Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (3), 347–378. doi:10.5840/beq200818327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar