General

Bob Murphy's theistic case for libertarianism

Stephen — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:44:17 GMT

Bob Murphy:

We are engaged in a great struggle for liberty. There are forces at work in the world seeking to literally enslave all of mankind. At any moment in history, there is a small minority who have given their time, treasure, and even lives in an effort to hinder and ultimately defeat the would-be tyrants.

Ironically, some of the most passionate and zealous combatants – and the combat might not be physical, but instead take place on the plane of ideas – are acting inconsistently with their own professed views of the ultimate foundations of justice and morality. Only if we believe in some higher power, and moreover one that has constructed the very fabric of the universe to ensure that good will triumph over evil, does our struggle make any sense.

...

The theist who believes in a just and omnipotent God does not suffer from the above inconsistencies. He can justify his passionate and heroic defense of liberty. Even if he dies, he knows he has done the right thing – where "right thing" is not defined as a set of strategies to maximize the likelihood of achieving earthly happiness.

Belief in the God of the Bible gives one hope in the ultimate triumph of good over evil. We know that those who enslave, steal, and murder may experience temporary victories, but that ultimately they are doomed to defeat.

Your thoughts?

Austrian & Keynesian Theories Vs. Mathematical Facts

DrKrbyLuv — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:40:35 GMT

George Orwell’s classic 1984 describes “doublethink” as holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously and accepting both. To do so denies the existence of objective reality. A good example is the belief in economic theories that contradict mathematical facts.

Both Austrian and Keynesian economic theories hold fundamental beliefs that do not square up with math. The exponential growth of debt in our debt based money system is ignored and refuted by both theories. In place of math, we are offered beliefs such as the “quantity theory of money.”

To deny the exponential growth of debt cuts to the very core and credibility of monetary theories. If the exponential growth can be proven, then equally, Austrian and Keynesian theories are dis-proven. Economic theories hide the fact that a debt based money system is usury by definition and neither Austrian nor Keynesian theories are sustainable. Both systems create bankruptcies and defaults while enriching banks at the expense of the people.

The inherent and terminal mathematical flaw of debt based systems can be proven anecdotally. Our total money supply (M3) is around $15 trillion while our national and private debt total around $55 trillion. How do we pay an existing $55 trillion in debt with a total of $15 trillion? We are short $40 trillion, where will that money come from?

In our debt based monetary system there is only one way to add money and that is through new debt. Eventually, the $40 trillion must be borrowed. If the money is borrowed, it will add new debt of over $40 trillion (principal + interest). The debt can only grow, it can never be repaid as the gap between money and debt will continue to increase.

The two economic theories will try to explain away this reality by claiming that the velocity of money can be increased so that a given amount of money can be used for more transactions. This is true when we spend money but it is not true when we repay debt. When debt is repaid it is extinguished, that is that the money ceases to exist which means that money can only be used to repay principal debt once. Most of the interest debt returns to circulation but never the less, the gap between money and debt will still increase since only the principal is created through new debt which brings new interest.

The specie of money doesn’t matter. If our money were backed by gold, the gold would simply be transferred to those who collect the interest. We saw this in 1933 when the gold standard collapsed and we lost most of our gold.

The two prevailing economic theories give us a false sense of choice just like the two party system of Democrats and Republicans. The science of money has been replaced by a belief system just like in the dark ages when science was dominated and defined by religious beliefs. If the next renaissance is to happen, it will come when the science of money displaces unfounded beliefs.

We are suffering from an intellectual amnesia. The Babylonians of antiquity understood the destructive power of debt interest and at one time Christianity and Judaism forbid it as sinful usury. The Islamic faith still forbids debt interest and perhaps that is a reason that we are clashing.

Our debt based monetary system is a form of usury that will result in the transfer of all wealth from the many to the few. The intended outcome is debt slavery and tyranny under the cruel boots of oligarchs - a financial aristocracy.

People are becoming discontent and they sense that something is terribly awry. To rebel against the status quo invariably leads to another tyranny as we have seen through democratic elections and third world rebellions.

If a successful peoples revolution is to happen it will really be an awakening. A higher consciousness where we come to understand how and why the game has been rigged by flawed monetary theories.

The hard left thinks Obama is shaping into von Mises

Marko — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:24:39 GMT

Before you go on take a moment and ask yourself do you really want to read this? In case you do, and you probably shouldn`t:

The Great Stimulus Debate of '09:
"Crybabies need not apply"

By MIKE WHITNEY

Barack Obama has decided to push the economy back into recession, and no one can figure out why. Perhaps the impressionable Obama has come under the spell of the deficit hawks and crystal gazers who see Armageddon around every corner. Or maybe he's thrown-in with the snappish Marc Faber whose dire predictions of hyperinflation are about as cheery as Hieronymus Bosch's vision of Hell. Whatever the reason, the President has done a hasty volte-face and decided that trimming the deficits in the middle of a severe economic downturn is the way to go. Here's what Obama said just days ago on his Asia tour:

"I think it is important to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession."

Obama is either getting some very bad advice or he's simply determined to drive a stake into the flickering economy. All plans for deficit-pruning should be postponed until the economy steadies itself and the jobs picture improves. Raising taxes or slashing spending while the economy is still contracting is crazy. It shows that Obama is being influenced by the Gain through Pain school who think that mass liquidation and years of bitter retrenchment are the best medicine. They're wrong. Sensible people look for solutions that don't involve hair shirts, moving to underground bunkers or living off root-crops for the next millennia.

Obama's metamorphosis into Ludwig von Mises sends a disturbing message to working people as well as to foreign creditors. It suggests that the commander-in-chief is in the thrall of careworn Jeremiahs. If that's the case, things could get ugly fast. With the Democrats backing-down on a second round of stimulus, the Fed signaling an end to quantitative easing, and Obama moaning about rising deficits; there's a good chance that the ailing economy could take another dunk down the elevator chute.

To read more: http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney11202009.html

Could the free market choose Ammunition as money?

bearing01 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:44:51 GMT

I'm thinking no... but I'm adding 9mm and .357 to my "precious" metal portfolio because that's what I shoot. I roll my own ammo so I have the bullet, powder, primers and cases all separate and roll as much ammo I want on demand. In today's recent climate all these materials are very scarce and are being hoarded. When one finds product on the shelves they stock up. Bullets are typically made of Lead and Copper. Casings are Brass (copper + zinc). Price of these things are only going up with inflation and demand. I recently bought primers from a gun forum member at 50% higher than store list price. Small pistol primers here in California at your local store are priceless right now. Obama has been an absolute excellent stimulus for firearm and ammunition purchases! People who forgot they owned guns are now joining the NRA and buying ammo.

Thinking about how gold and silver both together don't work simultaneously well as money; the value of one cannot be a fixed denomination of the other, and one needs a single unit of account for economic calculation... lets apply that to ammo. I'm thinking that a loaded cartridge / round (the assembled ammunition) would not work well as money either. To load a round of ammunition you need the primer, bullet, case and powder. Each one of these things can be in different demand and supply. Then there's the quality of the round considering different bullet types - hollow point versus wadcutter (pellet). And then there's the caliber for what particular gun you own. 9mm Luger seems to be perhaps the most common ammo of them all considering that's what police use. However, people who do not own 9mm guns would have to find someone else who wants 9mm to exchange their ammo with for other goods.

Just some random thoughts.

Anyone else have such a precious metal portfolio?

Libertarian/Anarchist Relational Chart

filc — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:34:49 GMT

I am starting this thread as inspired by Sage's comment quoted below. From this thread. You don't need to read it but if your wondering where all this started thats where.

Sage:
Excellent post.

I think another worthwhile project would be to gather all of the premises from which libertarianism follows and represent them in an argument tree/flow chart. This would be a great heuristic device, because it would show exactly how libertarian conclusions follow from our premises.

In addition to another project we are working on here, I'd also like to set something up like this.

Format

I am currently thinking of a pie like chart covering 3 topics.

Economics \\ Philosophy \\ History

Each Pie peice in their respective sections will carry the details of that section. Each detail will have a relational trace leading back to other related details. The end result will show how each peice is intertwined and important but also how certian peices directly relate to others.

For example in the Economics section there will be a box or pic-art called Business Cycle Theory. That box may have a line connecting to History's "The Great Depression" or the Depression of 2007 or whatever.

Effects of Taxation may be in the economics section and it may link to other Austrian Economic details. Taxation may also link to NAP, and NAP would like to the definition of Property. Since aggression cannot be defined without a clear definition of property, this is why IP advocates have such a hard time.

Topics

There are literally hundreds of topics and not all Austrian topics will possibly fit inside our chart. I'd like to make it poster sized. The more relevant or more important topics or details will be larger boxes or pic-arts over less important boxes. Foundational Topics especially need to be bigger, but they can then trace off to smaller more detailed topics.

Someone should literally be able to trace their finger from topic to topic and see how everything is relational. It shows how our beliefs are not made on a whim but on possibly the most comprehensive consistent moral and ethical construct mankind has ever known.

I will be the first to admit that I am not anywhere remotely well read as many here on the mises forums and History is especially my weak spot. So I will create a draft and post it here. The draft will be small but just tell me what topics to add, how relevant they are (Determine their size) and what their relationships will be. I hope to have a draft posted tonight or tomorrow.

Grandoise Vision

If we do a good job I'd like to have a professional go back over the chart and polish it up. They can add relevant pictures for each topic and make it look real good. Ultimately I think it would be an awesome idea for a poster that could be for sell at the mises store.

Even if that goal is not obtainable the project could render a seriously useful utility for many of us here as Sage has pointed out.

On a side note I need some advise for another project here.

So, I am thinking about opening a bank account...

Justin Laws — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:08:51 GMT

I haven't had one since, well, never. Unless you count a savings account your parents opened for you when you were a kid. Which no longer exists.

I've actually been using a Western Union Pre-Paid Visa Debit Card. I have no credit, too. Never had a credit card before. But the woman I have been livign with for years has decided she wants to buy 5 + acres of land and build a house on it... plus, I don't own my own vehicle, and now I need one.

I have never really been trusting of banks, as all the fees kind of suck to pay, and other things...

I am trying to figure out which bank would be best to use. Does anyone have any advice?

Legality of private currency in US

ClaytonB — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:16:19 GMT

I have a question on the legality of private currency issue in the US. There are several legal assertions I frequently read on mises.org and lewrockwell.com that I have been unable to substantiate with amateur research:

- Private coinage is illegal. When I've researched this, it appears that it's only private coinage that is similar enough to that issued by the US Mint to be potentially used as counterfeit that is illegal.

- Private issue of paper currency is illegal. There seems to be no legal basis for this assertion whatsoever. The current federal law nowhere prohibits issue of private paper currency that I can find, again, except for counterfeit money.

- Gold-denominated contracts are illegal. I don't know if this provision of the 1934 Act was ever repealed, but when I search the relevant federal statutes I can find nothing prohibiting denominating contracts in units of gold.

Now, I know that the US Treasury Dept. has been using the Secret Service as a leg-breaking service to intimidate anyone impertinent enough to issue coins or paper notes which compete with Federal Reserve Notes. But if I'm right that the above items are not actually illegal, then it should just be a matter of holding sufficient capital to fight and win the legal battles with the US Treasury monopoly in order to create a competitive private currency.

Can anyone substantiate the above assertions with a reference to the relevant federal statutes or case law? Thanks.

Clayton -

FAQ Page or WIKI FAQ or whatev...

filc — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 06:05:12 GMT

Howdy Folks,

Its kind of been a brainstorm week for me for whatever reason. At any rate it just dawned on me... Shouldn't we have a FAQ page for those repetative pesky questions we seem to get on a weekly basis? IE, Public Roads, National Defense, Welfare, Business Cycles, blah blah blah.

Can we use the Wiki page for that? I was browsing through it and didn't find any specific articles on some of the most common statists topics we seem to get. A nice wiki article + links to literature for those common topics would be a great FAQ alternative. Also the Wiki on this site doesn't seem very organic. It's not anything like mediawiki is it? It seems somewhat limited, though I have yet to post a topic....

Need help from Anient Greek enthusiasts

Dondoolee — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 02:08:41 GMT

I am looking for info on the following subjects of Hellenistic history:

1) Any interesting or definitive books/ aricles on the "Dark Age/ 8th Century renaissance" period on beuracratic and govt organizations and trade.

2) Any well sourced answers/books/ articles on the relationship and policies of tyrants with the poor ("thetes", lower rung "hoi mesoi") in the Archaic period.

3) A comparison of taxes and public work projects of Hellenic polises and Persian policies around the time of the 1st Persian war.

Much thanks for any help.

Videos on the 2008 recession

Democracy for Breakfast — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:50:04 GMT

What are some good videos/documentaries to watch on the causes of the 2008 recession? I want to watch a documentary on the macroeconomic causes, so that I don't have to read Thomas E. Woods 'The Meltdown'. I can't read something that heavy right now.

Against the Death Tax

krazy kaju — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:00:11 GMT

Enjoy. :-)

(Please visit the site to view this media)

I used to think that the death tax was relatively irrelevant, when compared to taxes on investment like the corporate tax or the capital gains tax. These videos show, however, that the death tax is a huge tax on small business and investment which brings in very little revenue to the state.

The strange appeal of socialism. Why?

William Green — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:42:48 GMT

If you have read Lew Rockwell's article today, you may be discouraged as I am. It raises a question I have been wrestiling with. I will try to put it into words: If freedom is the path to greater human fulfillment (and I believe it is), and if people naturally seek higher satisfaction (fulfillment), then why does there seem to be a tendency for individuals to reject freedom? The libertarian philosophy asserts that freedom and self-determination are part of human nature--these are the ways to maximize human potential and fulfillment. Yet the majority of human individuals reject freedom and self-determination.

This seems to prevent a problem for the freedom philosophy. It seems to indicate that we may be wrong about human nature. It seems as if human nature is against freedom.

If we say that there are two sides to human nature: animal vs. rational, for example, then it seems that the animal side is the more powerful of the two. Why should this be so? If the rational enhances survival and fulfillment, then shouldn't it win out over time through selection processes, both among individuals and populations as awhole (on large time scales)?

Any ideas?

Really Ignorant people you've encountered on a political basis.

Libertyandlife — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 06:00:57 GMT

Just went to a party, swear I've never heard heard someone so outright say they didn't want to talk about Ron Paul, thought he was crazy and a joke, and the same to libertarianism. She said she was a liberal democrat who supports Hillary, I've never heard someone so closed minded towards libertarian politics EVER. I've talked to both socialists, real conservatives who like rush, and other non libertarians who were in between, and I've had agreeing points with all, and much friendlier responses except her.

She had no openness to legalization of marijuana. She kept bashing libertarians with no actual points. Seemed to be so elitist in her words that I think it made her sound ignorant. She was even talking about all the experience shes had as if this complete justification for a lack of logic. She held no actual argument, just bashing and thought we were just talking or debating on politics. Debate, really? She thought Obama was actually doing something and when I told her he held all the same stances as Bush, she was giving that first year in office excuse.

I'm shocked some republicans are more open. She couldn't even answer my arguments, but kept contentlessly bashing, with no backing up. Sure some republicans are bigots, but some democrats are really pissing me off.

Similar experiences?

Finding books on the Internet

Peter Sidor — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:11:52 GMT

Searching here and there for resources, it makes you appreciate any book available online, so you don't have to lose time going into a library. For many older books, not even a large library may help.

While far from perfect, online books are immediately accessible and ready to be quoted - if you can find them. Here are a few useful links to search online books at, feel free to add more!

Gutenberg.org, the oldest digital library with many books in the public domain, often old books and quite a few economical texts too.

The Internet Archive contains huge amounts of information, little of it useful... and then it can surprise with the oddest finds.

The Open Library boasts of having many books as well. Haven't had any experience with it yet, but it looks hopeful.

Google Books have often only incomplete versions, but it should do for most quoting.

Last but not least, Mises.org has many Austrian and related books too!

When will the college tuition bubble collapse?

I. Ryan — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:53:33 GMT

Any ideas?

Building Rothbardia

Bleicke — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:16:25 GMT

Hello guys,

So I've read my Rothbard and my Minerva and now I'm faced with the following question: how do we build our own Minerva? I don't believe in turning a state libertarian from the inside out. I'd rather take the Minerva-route, buy some land and found my own country. I think seasteading is cool, but I really like land.

I'm sure many people here are interested in this also. Are there any projects going on at the moment? If not, why don't we start our own? Building a country takes lots of people, money, time and effort. I'm convinced that it can be done, though, even if it takes a few years or decades.

Who here's interested in joining up for a project group of some sort? Since it's a very complicated topic and different people have different pieces of knowledge needed to make this work, there needs to be a boatload of thinking, brainstorming and discussion going on. For starters we can discuss in this thread, maybe later get our own project site somewhere. This is pre-pre-0.1-Alpha stage (at least for me), but we've got to start sometime.

Topics which I think are important (feel free to add anything I forgot and comment on anything I got wrong):

- Where will Rothbardia be?

I'm thinking Africa, coast. Africa because there's a lot of weak governments. If we do this in Langley, they'll shoot us down in no time. In Africa, many people don't give a shit about their government and might join us. Many governments there are just warlords. We'll definitely be attacked by these warlords, but they're easier to defend against than the US.

Why not an island? In the beginning an island might be of advantage due to the isolation. But when this thing really goes off, the isolation will be our biggest problem! There will be lack of space, transportation and immigration. Also, islands in the Pacific get hurricaned all the time.

- Will it even be called Rothbardia?

This is just my name for it. Call it what you want, so long as we make it work.

- How will we get the land?

I'm thinking buying from the owners, not the government. Unless the government IS the owner, in which case we'll buy from them. I don't think "buying sovereignty" is the right start. We don't accept authority of meta-beings like states. We respect the ownership of the land by the natives of the area.

Another point for Africa: I'm guessing many people will be happy to sell their land for a)little money or b)promise of future goods. We could just give them a house when we're done. Raising the standard of living is in anyones interest, and in many African areas it might be as easy as providing water.

- How will we get the money?

Yea, this is a good one. Of course we'll have to be filthy rich to get this started. But a few hundred dedicated people should be able to do this. Right? Maybe we'll get investors.

IF this takes off, we'll have huge industry in no time. If only for tax purposes.

- How will we purchase the land?

In Minerva, a huge company is formed which then buys the land, sub-contracting it to all the residents. We could either do it that way or buy our shares individually. It shouldn't be more expensive than buying land anywhere else on the planet. Probably cheaper in the beginning.

- Public Relations

I think it's important to be open about this. There shouldn't be any chance of "Rich Right-Wingers Exploit African Natives" spin. This could easily be done with a few semi-dedicated journalist types and a website. If everyone can see we're friendly, non-criminal people and actually RAISE the standard of living in these areas, nobody has any reasons to condemn us. This could be a war-preventer, in my opinion. We don't want the american public to feel we're a threat to freedom or anything.

- Immigration Policy

Immigration is practically non-existent in a private country, as I understand it. If you're "in", it's because you OWN or RENT the part you're in. There is no problem with immigration, because immigrants won't be "taking our jobs" or "siphoning our social systems empty". If they get in, it's because they paid for it.

In fact immigration will be of great advantage in this system, because each immigrant will mean more productive work. People can work in Rothbardia and rent a house or apartment. Many of the locals might do this, as it's probably more lucrative for them than farming for rice or what they did before.

I also think Rothbardia should be open about joining it. Everyone who owns land can join Rothbardia. This way, our country would spread like a virus. A good virus! If our neighbors see the advantages of living in Rothbardia, they can just join up and the country grows organically. This doesn't even have to be local neighbors, it could be people around the world. But those would probably rather found their own country after our example.

- Law

I'm not very knowledgeable in this category, but I'm sure many of you are.

It's mostly IP I'm concerned about. If we do non-IP (which is the libertarian thing to do, isn't it?), will major corporations even join our country? Right now most companies are freaking out about outsourcing to China, because they don't respect IP properly. If we openly declare that IP is worthless in our country, will companies not be afraid to even sell their products to us?

- Defense

I see three main defense scenarios.

1)Random thugs and raiders

This shouldn't be too hard if we bring some rednecks with guns.

2)Warlords

Depending on the area, this might be hard. They'd probably just kill and loot everyone. It would be easy diplomacy-wise, because it's clear we're the victims. The fight would be hard. Some african countries have less than 1 million residents, some have 150 millions. We'd have to find a region that is not too badly struck by warlordery.

3)Western countries

Some western countries might feel threatened by us or declare we're violating some UN resolutions. Some of the european tax havens have been "economically attacked" because they didn't release information about their bank customers! And the US has attacked countries for less than that.

This would be a VERY hard battle, but I think it could be very dependent on diplomacy. If people get the impression we're a bunch of armed thugs taking advantage of poor people, we'll get attacked immediately. If we instead are able to project the truth, by being open and inviting journalists etc., we might prevent such an attack. It's more difficult for a democratic government to attack a bunch of nice people that do nothing but help the local economy.

That's just the stuff going through my brain right now. Let's make this more than just a book we all like (Minerva). Let's try to do it for real. It's a long way, but this might be the first step.

Also: please don't reply to tell me this is a stupid idea or why Anarcho-Capitalism is flawed. Constructive criticism is very much wanted, but no "your idea is shit!" stuff. If I made major mistakes or forgot major points, just join the discussion. It's going to be our country, so we should all discuss it.

Henry Hazlitt - Sources required.

Prashanth Perumal — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:26:03 GMT

Does anybody here possess reading resources on the life and times of economic journalist Mr. Henry Hazlitt? If anybody does, please share it here.

Hoppelogic

Prateek Sanjay — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:34:23 GMT

Private property capitalism and egalitarian multiculturalism are as unlikely a combination as socialism and cultural conservatism. And in trying to combine what cannot be combined, much of the modern libertarian movement actually contributed to the further erosion of private property rights (just as much of contemporary conservatism contributed to the erosion of families and traditional morals). What the countercultural libertarians failed to recognize, and what true libertarians cannot emphasize enough, is that the restoration of private property rights and laissez-faire economics implies a sharp and drastic increase in social “discrimination” and will swiftly eliminate most if not all of the multicultural-egalitarian life style experiments so close to the heart of left libertarians. In other words, libertarians must be radical and uncompromising conservatives.

I thought a free society simply meant no coercion and no dictates against private property. How on earth does personal morality come into a relevant part of this issue? It has nothing to do with it.

Really - unless you subscribe to arbitrarily defined "conservative" values held by Hoppe, you won't have a libertarian society? I am trying really hard to make sense of it here. I don't support Brazilian style forced integration policies or Indian style affirmative action, but how on earth does that mean that unless everyone fights against there happening to be multiculturalism, society will "contribute to further erosion of property rights"? Or that they hence must be "radical and uncompromising conservatives"?

I don't care if my neighbourhood is "monocultural" or "multicultural"; I'd simply let whomsoever move in, who legitimately acquires private property there, and won't make it my business. I wouldn't use statist coercion against anyone's personal discrimination, any more than I would personally try to discriminate, in order to safeguard some sense of conservatism.

I just don't understand how or why Hoppe likes to use his irrelevant personal values into the picture of broader political and economic issues. This man is just a plain and simple WIERDO.

Stuff we can do

liberty student — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:17:52 GMT

Here is some stuff we can do.

Promote Mises.org books and the bookstore.
Promote liberty oriented web sites.
Increase our own knowledge of Austrian Economics and liberty oriented philosophy
Present a positive image of libertarianism
Spread articles and flyers.
Spread ebooks, youtubes and audio
Raise money for libertarian causes, through fund raising or your own direct charity
Live as free as possible. Not confront the state necessarily, but given choices, choose libertarian oriented activities, including but not limited to,
- Entrepreneurship
- Education
- Charity
- provide and use services the state fails at (raw milk, natural medicine, home schooling,data security)

Without going into too much detail, the propaganda corps always needs help. People with money could help pay libertarian students during summers and between semesters to write content, to create analysis. To make appropriate edits to Wikipedia to keep Austrian Econ pages up to date and accurate. To comment daily on Paul Krugman's blog. To create YouTube videos, to hand out lit on campus.

Feel free to add on.

But the gist is, there is a lot you can do, with little or no money, with little or no free time, on your own, without waiting for a plan, orders from a leader or collaborators. The hardest thing is getting started. People are slow to take the initial step. Once you start walking, it's easier to break into a run.

How to handle evil

The Late Andrew Ryan — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:29:10 GMT

I've come to realize somthing, and that is that those around me are advocates of evil. It's one thing to realize the horrors of statism, and to begin advocating a society based on perfect liberty and the principals of property and NAP but what do you do that day you wake up and realize that those around you are evil? That your mother, father, friends, and associates, despite their many good intentions, support violence and coersion to attain these goals?? I would never associate with a thief, murderer, or parasite but then why should I associate with those who hapilly hand over the means to these criminals? Am I over reacting? How do I deal with this moral paradox and how do you?

Basic books on free market (recommendations)

emb021 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:07:04 GMT

Am going to be doing a short (less then 10 minutes) speech for my Toastmasters club, and will be doing it on capitalism/free market. Idea basically is to explain what free market capitalism is, and briefly touch on other economic systems that are sometimes confused with capitalism (socialism, fascism, mercantism/corporatism).

I'd like to provide a handout at the end with these definitions, and a recommended reading list. I've like the list to be short, and with easy to read, easily obtainable works.

Any suggestions?

Some I am thinking of including are "Economics in One Lesson", "PIG Guide to Capitalism". Any others people would recommend? I plan on doing this within the next couple of weeks, so am putting together things now.

General pro-school arguments

Capital Pumper — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:34:11 GMT

I've started to notice these points being used frequently by my opponents in discussions on proverbial schools.

1. Schooling is required to develop academic skills; such as reading, writing, and arithmetic.

2. These institutions serve as a foundation for social interaction, and teach youth valuable cooperation skills needed in the real world.

3. Children should not have a choice in the matter, since they are at a age where they don't know what's best for them. If it weren't for their parent's use of coercion, the children would play video games all day; subsequently ruining their own future.

4. To say that school is a government indoctrination center is a generalization. Most of the classes are purely objective, such as science and math. Government indoctrination in U.S.S.R schools was minimal, since most of what they taught (far more proficiently than any North American or European school today) were the sciences.

5. Kid raising tool.

What say you denizens of Mises forum?

Starter Books

Blueline976 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:55:55 GMT

So with Christmas coming up soon, I am thinking about getting some hard copies of books. Audiobooks are nice, but not very good for retaining information (in my case anyway). So, what books should I get? I'm looking for starter books here, no Human Action just yet. I was thinking about For A New Liberty and Economics In One Lesson. Any other suggestions?

Homeschool vs Formal School

Physiocrat — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:49:40 GMT

I'm getting married next year intend to have kids in the next two years or so and am seriously considering homeschooling; however my fiancee isn't too keen to put it midly. My main reason for considering is that even the private schools ape the government schools so consequently kids aren't taught to think. Unsuprisingly my fiancee's main criticism is that they'll end up as social retards. So if anyone can link me articles, debates etc or just chip in on the relative merits of either institutional system it'd be much appreciated.

What would be of great interest would be if anyone has done a historical analysis on the social interactions of children in particular before mass schooling (pre- 1850 or so)

Btw I'm over in the UK.

Some of you guys might get a kick out of this.

Jonathan — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:51:01 GMT

Let me see if I understand all this....
IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET
12 YEARS HARD LABOR...
IF YOU GO INTO CHINA ILLEGALLY, YOUR CONSIDERED A SPY AND
GET HARD PRISON TIME...
IF YOU GO INTO GERMANY ILLEGALLY, YOU GET A HEFTY FINE, WORK
IT OFF OR PAY IT OFF, THEN DEPORTED...
IF YOU GO INTO ENGLAND ILLEGALLY, YOU ARE IMMEDIATELY
JAILED AND DEPORTED...
IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED
INDEFINITELY...
BUT, IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET:
1. A DRIVERS LICENSE
2. A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD
3. WELFARE
4. FOOD STAMPS AND
5. FREE HEALTH CARE?
I got it... maybe we need to VOTE OUR LAWMAKERS OUT.

GO GREEN! RECYCLE CONGRESS!

Is it a fair statement to say: Our own laws, or system, is destroying us economically?"