-
If a writer has no background in Austrian economics and just looks at history through statistics, they can be forgiven for that erroneous assumption. (The assumption that Obama created or influenced somehow this profit and therefore it was good for the country) That is what Keynesian politicians and reporters and economists want them to do. The article
-
Those are statistics that are not going to be available in an accurate form ever. And opinions will vary depending on who gives them. 1. In my opinion there has never been a society that reduced the total number of citizens on the welfare rolls by providing welfare. I am aware of instances where the numbers were reduced by adding work requirements or
-
Yes I agree with Groucho but even further: Regardless of who's stupid and who is smart, all people respond to incentives. It is not true to say the restauranteur would not do anything. While the bridge laborers are taxing his staff and providing temporary profit, he might add more part time staff, stay open longer and increase the short term inventory
-
I suspect that this problem will only arise in newly homesteaded river owners. If you take the example of surface land rights being sold apart from mining and mineral rights. A farmer might only be interested in running cattle on the surface of the land, so he might be perfectly willing to sell the underground rights to a diamond miner for a profit
-
OK I'll take a bite at this. Yes the argument is going to hinge on the definition af "social injustice" There can be no narrow definition of oit nor can there ever be an accurate measurement of it. The anti capitalists at the end of the day mean that under capitalism some people make more money than others. They call it many names. They
-
Two responses: You say for this argument you don't care what people do with their money. Clearly you care - if only to the extent that you have some inner belief that money spent on something "tangible' or of "objective value" is somehow of more importance than other money or pursuits. - In a free market society-it is utterly
-
The government has no right to pick winners or losers, or define "healthy" businesses vs. "frivolous or silly" businesses, and neither do you. Only the market can decide that. If the casino stays in business that means there are enough consumers willing to keep them in business regardless of what you personally think of that ...
-
OK ,just to not confuse the issue, lets make sure when you say "violated your rights" you are only talking about contractual rights, not other kinds, like natural rights.(for instance the right to freedom which is assumed and does not require a contract.) Usually people use the term "violated my rights" when they are referring to
-
What was your point in posting this Wheylous? An example of enforcement of private contracts between two private parties. Is there a libertarian lesson in there? Are you implying that Wendys International infringed on the private rights of the restauranteur? He has total freedom to continue his own restaurant in whatever unhygienic conditions he prefers
-
Going back to the headline of " income inequality " There are people that are twenty times more beautiful than me, there are people that are maybe twice as smart as me (heh heh not many) there are people who are a hundred times more musical than me there are people that are a hundred times more athletic than me and lets thank the stars for