The broken window fallacy argues that there is no economic gain from fixing the destruction caused by a certain event. Even though capital will be spent to repair any damages, ...

The broken window fallacy, as it is often called, was introduced by French economist Frederic Bastiat in 1850 in his essay, "That Which is Seen and That Which is Unseen." ...

The parable of the broken window, or often called the “broken window fallacy,” was introduced by French economist Frederic Bastiat in 1850 in his essay, “That Which is Seen, and That Which ...

The broken window fallacy is reproduced over and over every day, but rarely is it as clear as glass. Thank you New York Times for giving us the broken windshield fallacy.

Suppose that a strong earthquake were to destroy a sizable part of a city. The rebuilding process would involve massive investment, procurement of materials and services, and employment. But can ...

William Smith explains the parable of the broken window and explains how money spent to replace a broken window could have been spent elsewhere. He likens that to aid to Ukraine and Israel.

The broken window fallacy is used to emphasise the idea of opportunity cost and the need to look beyond the obvious to find the true, often unintended, economic consequences of an action.

Have you heard the parable of the broken window? It’s a wonderful example of unintended consequences that applies not only to businesses activity and government regulations but to individuals as ...

That is the “broken windows fallacy”: If a window is broken, the need to replace it will create business for the glass producers, employment for the repair personnel, ...