-
Thank you - your answer confirmed what I thought would be the answer. I have thought a little bit more about this, and 'discovered' something interesting: imagine a particular region is for some odd reason the only region in the entire world that can produce a certain substance that for some reason becomes an absolute necessity for survival
-
I think making a link between the monetary system and whether or not there is war is not quite sound. Fiat money may make it easier to finance war, but this tells us nothing about the motivation for war. Based on my reading of Rothbard and Hoppe, the cause of war is primarily the interest of the rulers who see it to their advantage to engage in war
-
[quote user="Jonas"] So I go buy a TV from my buddy Phil and pay him in JonasBucks? He then takes those JonasBucks and tries to buy a pizza from a local store? I can't see how that could work...I'll have to brush up on my Hayek. I don't see any difference between this issuance of private currency and barter. [/quote] If Phil is
-
Based on my understanding of Hayek's "Denationalisation of Money", there is no need to 'adopt' the Gold Standard. All that is necessary is to allow the issuance of private currency by anyone who wants to issue it (and under conditions of 'trademark' protection). The government could issue whatever it wants to issue, but
-
I understand the general argument against econometrics (Which I first came across in Callahan’s “Economics for Real People”). Here’s my question, though: I have done a number of correlation analyses between, for example, the proportion of the workforce active in agriculture and the GDP/capita, from which one can conclude that above a certain level of
-
I think the worker has a property right to his 'labour', which I understand to be a combination of his personal time and his skills. He offers this on the market, and comes to an agreement with a buyer of his labour. As long as he is renumerated for his labour as agreed, everything should be fine, but I think there is nothing that should prohibit
-
I would think this simply supports the contention of those who see the State as the problem: the companies were using their political access to engage in what was effectively a business transaction. There is no inherent obligation to honor contracts -- there is merely the wisdom of honoring contracts, because if you do not, your chances for 'repeat
-
Thank you, and apologies for asking what is most likely a dead horse. I just tossed it off between readings, just to clarify. I was sure it was covered under the right to association. :) ta, dietwald
-
I understand why government backed unions, laws against 'strike breaking', etc. make little economic sense (and can be considered immoral). But what about this: what if workers in a factory simply get together to bargain collectively with the managment as a matter of efficiency, or because they feel that it is in their interest? Note that the