Ideas Matter

Was Milton Friedman Right? What A Difference Thirty Years Makes

What a difference thirty years makes.

Before we get into the evidence, we should mention that Frances Fox Piven seems to be conflating colonialism with capitalism. If, for example, property rights institutions provide a basis for any free enterprise system, it's difficult to see how commerce could have amounted to peasants losing their farms (unless, of course, by lose she means sold). When peasants have their land taken, it's always by governments or cronies colluding with governments to undermine property rights.

But back to the question--relatively speaking (because there is no perfectly free system on earth): Do the most economically free countries tend to produce more freedom and equality?

The Sacketts Beat the EPA - SCOTUS

In a rare bit of good news, the EPA has lost in the Supreme Court. This is not a death-blow for these Gruene Polizei, but it is certainly one step towards putting the regulatory daemons back into Pandora's Box. Here's what happened...

Petty Fascism and Free Speech

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.

Economies in Transition: A Question of Institutions

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, some countries have done better than others. The question of whether capitalism has succeeded or failed in these countries is the degree to which the countries have actually embraced capitalism. In other words, institutions matter. And some countries adopted better rules than others. Adding to Professor Yakovlev's analysis, let's consider some of the evidence.

Smoking Bans Ban Liberty and Property

I don't smoke. I used to. And I like it. But since I quit I don't much like walking into a smoky bar and have to smell it, get it in my clothes, etc. Do my preferences supercede the property rights of the bar owner--which may include allowing people to smoke?

Robert Nozick: Answering a Critique (Tamar Gendler)

In this Big Think video, Tama Gendler explains the basics of Nozick's entitlement theory, then makes a critical point near the end -- one that seems reasonable on its face. She suggests that without "theft" (taxation and redistribution), rich people will be able to buy the system that is meant to protect everyone's rights equally. It appears she is willing to accept the paradox of rights violation to prevent corruption and unequal access to justice. But there is a lot that is problematic about Gendler's point. Allow me to enumerate some of those problems below the fold:

The People's Private Panopticon

Lawrence O'Donnell is usually abysmal. He wouldn't bat an eye if IRS agents showed up with guns to take away the money that you earned honestly from creating value for customers. But to be fair, he's done a fine job assembling amateur video coverage of this New York City protest, which saw numerous examples of unnecessary police violence against peaceful protesters. 

Don't Hate the Player, Hate the Game

This is all good stuff. But I want to linger on the Ice-T quote Art Carden uses and is the title of this post. Because I think 85% of all corporation-hating could be redirected in the way Carden suggests.

Regulating Away the Poor

After yesterday's post, we have established a theme. Actually Reason TV did. And kudos to them for telling these powerful stories.

In the last post we explored the ways in which the regulatory state destroys opportunities for the poor. In this post we see how state power elites want to regulate them away -- literally. These state functionaries are either:

a) Trying to find a low-cost way of getting poor property owners off their land for the sake of future development (California is, after all, cash strapped); or

b) They are willing to let a wayward aesthetic sensibility undermine the person and his/her property.

My guess is it's probably both, but 75% the former.

From zoning laws to health and safety regulations, it seems like the same busybodies who claim to be champions of the poor are the ones are hurting them most. It's all for the "public good" you know.

Tragedy of the Commons Redux -- A Lesson for your Kids

There are a handful of concepts that I would make sure kids learned if I were king of the world. Among them is the tragedy of the commons. Why so important?