-
The scandanavian socialist nations are probably wealthy but only in a "seen vs. unseen" way. For instance everyone has jobs, income, etc. But all these gains are at the expense of generations of broken windows and according to some articles I read here on this site, are soon to be overtaken by the sheer destructive force of their taxes. It
-
In economics, fascism, socialism, and communism are heresies. The differences between them, although ostensibly great, are in fact quite small which is why they are commonly associated together. Fascism ="we'll only keep 45% of the economy controlled, temporarily and only in order to maintain reasonable organization of the system. We're
-
Another question: I've read Mises's discourse on the nature of probability and, perhaps owing to only an elementary handling of statistics and/or a misreading of the essay, I've been convinced that Mises slipped up on saying that case probability is unamenable to probability theory because human action occurs only in unrepeatable steps.
-
I'm asking if you could explain to me the different arguments against command economies: the hayekian and the misesian. Although I'm pretty sure what the misesian argument is there is one thing that is dramatically retarding my ability to understand it. When mises speaks of the businessman as using profit and loss to calculate and states that
-
If in a free market a subisidized firm outcompetes a free one, then why is'nt it that in a free market for military services, the subsidized militaries of the rest of the world won't overthrow the private one?
-
If anarcho-capitalism is the key to wealth, and iceland and ireland were anarcho-capitalist, then why were they not known for being extremely wealthy?