You had us at, 'Hello'

The Fly Under the Bridge Academy Committee on Flattery Will Get You Anything, thinks it's really, really cool to be mentioned in the same post as Richard Posner, Gary Becker, and Clint Eastwood:

In a EconLog post in which Arnold Kling links to the Becker post and Posner post on the case at the Becker-Posner blog, the issue of holdout comes up. Traditionally, eminent domain has been intended to enable local governments to circumvent holdout incentives in amassing plots of land necessary to complete required public works. In fact, Posner focuses on the holdout issue in his post, and Richard Epstein does as well in his commentary in today's Wall Street Journal.

In the comments to Arnold's post, Patrick Sullivan makes what I think is a suggestion worth considering: in a situation that could raise holdout incentives, why doesn't the potential buyer make each of the individual offers contingent on 100% acceptance? In fact, I just watched Pale Rider a couple of weeks ago, and the evil hydraulic mining owner basically did that to the tin-panners he was trying to drive out (of course, they told him to get stuffed and then Clint went in and kicked butt ...).

Especially when the mentioner is Northwestern economist (and Energy Goddess) Lynne Kiesling.