Interventionism

The New York Times trumpets a new theory of economics (actually a very old one) that yields predictably interventionist conclusions. Tibor Machan responds.

The Governor's supposed solution to the energy fiasco promotes the fiction that government solves problems that private businesses create.

Douglas Carey explains economic anomalies such as electricity shortages, flight delays, and overcrowded roads.

Wendy McElroy decries the EU's attempt to legislate equal rights for women: it will bring about a new form of despotism, she warns.

From rolling blackouts to water shortages, California's troubles result from regulation, says Thomas DiLorenzo

Only a few lines are remembered, writes James Ostrowski, but the entire speech is an appalling socialist harangue.

Woodward reports that Greenspan himself was willing, on occasion, to do things that weren't strictly legal.

Cheer up. A drop in stock prices doesn't destroy wealth, say Robert Murphy and Gene Callahan. It only reveals a change in the marketability of one line of production against another.

These agencies were established to intervene in the rights and liberties of Americans. A good cabinet, writes Bill Anderson, would work itself out of existence.

History frowns upon the belief that government protects children's rights, and yet that is precisely the claim that undergirds child labor laws, now enforced in most parts of the world. Hardly anyone dares question their existence, much less the conventional history of child labor, no matter how many children and families continue to be victimized by government regulation of labor.