Of all the false charges leveled against capitalism, the indictment of promoting or requiring imperialism and warfare is most certainly the least deserved. Given recent events, this proposition has received much undeserved attention, but is by no means new. This claim has a long legacy, tracing back at least to 19th century critics of Political Economy.
The accusations against Wal-Mart are many, and they include: paying overseas workers too little; not paying benefits to part-time workers; refusing to sell items that don't fall within its criteria for being "family-oriented"; not giving enough back to the community; and discriminating against women. Karen De Coster and Brad Edmonds respond.
Does the phenomenon of "reswitching" refute the Austrian theory of capital and interest? Contra Samuelson, no Austrian ever claimed that reswitching was mathematically impossible, writes Robert Murphy. Indeed, Austrians do not normally think in those terms at all, except when forced to in response to mainstream challenges.
Do deficits cause interest rates to be higher than they otherwise would be? Supply Siders, armed with historical data, say no. Unfortunately for them, writes Christopher Mayer, the conventional wisdom is closer to the truth. Deficits crowd out private investment, fritter away savings, and rob the public of valuable capital.
David made an enemy of the State because he dared to legally push the boundaries and defy the police state. He did so during a crusade aimed at the prevention of further regime encroachment into the lives of others. David's story, as told by Karen De Coster, is one of principle and perseverance.
Liberty is incompatible with taxation, writes Tibor Machan. This is despite the famous saying by Oliver Wendell Holmes that "Taxation is the price we pay for civilization." In fact, taxation is a most uncivilized way of obtaining funds, given that it boils down to nothing less than extortion.
Capitalism (the free economy) is constantly being criticized, and it usually comes down to opposition to, and resentment against, the merchant class. However, the arguments and examples that people use against business under capitalism are not only illogical but also inaccurate.
For a few billion dollars, you might expect to be able to bribe some small third world country into cleaning up its act, to defend the property rights of its citizens, to provide a stable currency, and to establish a non-interventionist economic and foreign policy. Not so, writes Mark Thornton.
The answers we receive from the academics in response to the collapse of the Enron Corporation and the implosion of other firms are not answers at all. At best, they deal only with effects, or, at worst, reverse the pattern of cause and effect. To put it another way, writes William Anderson, the people who are supposed to know the answers don’t even know what questions they should pursue.
It is hard to understand the vague and ill-defined laws Martha Stewart and Sam Waksal are accused of violating. But the premise of the law is not hard to divine: Competition in capital markets must proceed from a level playing field. All investors are entitled to the same information advantage irrespective of effort and abilities. In a word, socialism!
