So Bill Maher sends Alexandra Pelosi down to the poorest state in the union to interview poor people. We watch the video. What do we get in the panel commentary? Very little of substance. The once self-described "libertarian' Bill Maher would do well to invite more libertarians onto his show. Break the bubble a little. Here's what he might have gotten out of a decent panelist:
Okay, now that you've watched this video, ask yourself: what if you apply the economic way of thinking to political action? In other words, even though we don't need politicians to get the "good orders" we see around us, we nevertheless have to live with these characters. So what do actions, interactions and consequences have to do with the results we see in the public sphere (that we're so often troubled by)?
This video is not just an outline for aspiring politicians. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita actually describes, however indirectly, the architecture of power. I can't wait to read his book. It sounds to me like what you get when you marry Machiavelli with Buchanan and Tullock (public choice theory). So what do we mean by the architecture of power?
The above video has officially gone viral. For those in the business of producing free market media, we need to speculate as to why. We should also ask whether this is an echo-chamber piece or might actually be affecting the way some people think. Below is my assessment, for what it's worth. But before giving it, understand that 'video killed the think-tank star' -- in a manner of speaking. Let's discuss the communications strategy.
If you think we could soon have a flat tax, you're kidding yourself. Do you know how many parasites are nestled in the byzantine recesses of the U.S. tax code? Enough to make an army. That army would swarm out of the woodwork if we ever had a serious conversation about simplifying the internal revenue code. And guess who would be leading the charge: the IRS bureaucrat-H&R Block-tax lawyer complex. Don't believe me? Witness the parasites...
This video may strike our international readers as being rather U.S.-centric. But it's for everyone, let me assure you. In Andrew Napolitano's goodbye address, he is speaking unashamedly in favor of the principles that helped found the United States. But he is also speaking in universals. You see, what Napolitano is saying above used to be our American secular religion.
The enemies of limited government have succeeded in suggesting people like Napolitano are on the fringe, that his ideas are quaint, and those who still espouse those ideas are crude troublemakers.
Because there are a number of voting paradoxes, I’ll credit the Marquis de Concordet and Kenneth Arrow. Irrational results follow from majority-rule voting. For example, imagine you’re the owner of a small business. You need to make a decision about the business, so you decide to let your three top employees vote on the following three choices:
A lot of people think they have to pay full attention to the big-picture stuff -- like the national debt, international affairs, or the failure of fed policy. But some of the most egregious affronts to individual freedom happen right next door.
The Institute for Justice is doing a great job of defending people from petty fascism while telling the stories of the victims. If we don't start looking immediately around us, we may miss what's going on in our back yards -- and fail to defend ourselves and our neighbors from the local dictators.
Notice how in the lead-up to the election there seems to be slight improvement in the unemployment rate. But we're also starting to see the "ragged" forms of inflation to which Steve Horwitz refers in the video. Let's start with the price of gas. Not all of it, but a lot of it, is a result of inflation. Here's why: