Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Similarly, minarchists insist that market competition in the "production" of law and security in theory cannot generate a peaceful, just, and efficient society. Like the scientist, they ignore the many examples of successful stateless relations in history and in our own time, and refuse to examine and revise their theory of where law comes from and how it is enforced.
(The apparently true story on scientists and the bumblebee is here.)
Monday, June 29, 2009
Barack Obama insists he does not want the government to run the medical system. He insists that he wants only to fix what’s broken while leaving what works intact.The rest of my latest FFF op-ed is here.
Taking him at his word, this is typical of Obama. His desires are a primary, things that can be achieved if only we want them badly enough. All that prevents fulfillment are the obstacles created by uncooperative, ideological, and perhaps evil people.If Obama really believes this — and is not merely engaging in demagoguery (a strong possibility) — then he has the maturity of a child.
Friday, June 26, 2009
The crux of the economic difference between market anarchists and market minarchists is that the minarchists -- a priori -- find a market failure in the provision of law and security. Market anarchists do not. Considering that the minarchists embrace market theory in every other area, it seems they have the burden of showing why their own principles don't apply in those excepted areas. (It is significant that the first market anarchist we know of was an economist, Gustave de Molinari.)
Market anarchists have the theory, the history, and the moral philosophy. What's left?
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
The "bottom line":
You are able to redownload your books an unlimited number of times to any specific device.
Any one time the books can be on a finite number of devices. In most cases that means you can have the same book on six different devices.
Unfortunately the publishers decide how many licenses, that is devices, a book can be on at any one time. While most of the time that will be five or six different devices there will be times when it's only one device.
At the present time there is no way to know how many devices can be licensed prior to buying the book. [Emphasis added.]
I guess we shouldn't be surprised.
Cross-posted at Against Monopoly.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
Reminds me of the story philosopher Norman Malcolm told about Wittgenstein:
When in very good spirits he would jest in a delightful manner. This took the form of deliberately absurd or extravagant remarks uttered in a tone, and with the mien, of affected seriousness. On one walk he "gave" me each tree that we passed, with the reservation that I was not to cut it down or do anything to it, or prevent the previous owners from doing anything to it: with those reservations they were henceforth mine.Cross-posted at @TAC and Liberty & Power.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
I just watched David Mark of Politico say on MSNBC that there is no positive side to the closing of auto dealerships. No positive side? What about the freeing up of labor and resources for projects that will create -- rather than destroy -- value?
It is outrageous -- though hardly new -- that major news organizations have reporters covering economic news without knowing even the most basic concepts of economics -- such as scarcity!
Is ignorance of Bastiat's "broken window" fallacy that widespread?
Friday, June 12, 2009
America’s health-care system has problems — all traceable to government intervention — but it could be worse. And if the so-called reform emerging in Congress is enacted, it will be worse.My latest Future of Freedom Foundation op-ed, "Welcome to Post Office Health Care," is here.
Intellectual “property” (IP) is a sleeper issue. It seems uncontroversial: Someone invents or writes something and therefore owns it. What could be plainer? But IP contains the power to destroy liberty.The rest of TGIF is here.
President Obama says he doesn’t want the government to run health care. He just wants a “public option” to keep the private insurers “honest.” Imagine that: A government bureaucracy keeping someone else honest. Physician, heal thyself!
But would a public option keep insurers honest? People who dislike markets often spin horrifying scenarios about big companies engaging in cutthroat competition and predatory pricing to drive their rivals out of business. But none of these folks ever see this danger in government “enterprises.” A public option will have sources of revenue no private insurer has: captive taxpayers, the U.S. Treasury, and the Federal Reserve. Do you mean to tell me this won’t permit the government program to engage in cutthroat competition and predatory pricing against the private insusers? And let’s not forget that it will be government that dictates what products the private companies can sell.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
President Obama had sugared words for those concerned that government healthcare "reform" will violate freedom of choice. He insisted that people happy with their insurance and their doctor will be free to stick with them.
What he didn't say is what those people should do when the government's tax-subsidized "public option" insurance program and price controls drive private insurers out of the market and doctors get fed up dealing with the government.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
- Jim Davidson misstated his position.
- He does not believe people who disagree should seriously fight it out.
- He invited the offended vet, an ex-Marine, to argue with Doug Casey not at a FreedomFest but at a Blanchard Conference.
- Mark also playfully invited them to Indian arm wrestle.
- Doug did not win; it was a draw.
- Davidson asked to speak at FreedomFest; Mark did not approach him.
- The quote from an email that Mark sent Davidson is taken out of context.
My apologies to Mark. Unless new revelations arise, I am through with this.
Monday, June 08, 2009
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Friday, June 05, 2009
Most people believe that government must regulate the marketplace. The only alternative to a regulated market, the thinking goes, is an unregulated market. On first glance that makes sense.
The rest of TGIF, "Regulation Red Herring," is here.
Monday, June 01, 2009