It is striking that the major resurgence of Scholastic ideas came out of Austria in the late 19th century, a country that had avoided a revolutionary political or theological upheaval. If we look at Menger's own teachers, we find successors to the Scholastic tradition.
The intrusion of politics into the field of economics is simply an evidence of human ignorance or arrogance, and is as fatuous as an attempt to control the rise and fall of tides.
Although the system is inherently exploitative, it allows some leeway in the determination of which specific individuals will be the shafters and which the shaftees.
The economic analysis of repudiation applies to the debt of all levels of government and to all countries. The central question is not how big the government is or how much it owes, but rather whether the debt is funded by taxes.
The economic analysis of repudiation applies to the debt of all levels of government and to all countries. The central question is not how big the government is or how much it owes, but rather whether the debt is funded by taxes.
What would it mean for the economy if by one fell swoop not just the debt owed to the central bank, but all of it disappeared?
Opponents of natural rights often claim that natural rights aren't real because these rights have no clear boundaries. They claim we need a state to set these limits. Rothbard demonstrated that this claim is weak at best.
In my view the language of “homesteading” of persons (i.e., children) is best abandoned. Retaining it causes confusion, and nothing essential to the theory is lost by giving it up.
William Graham Sumner did not believe in "social Darwinism" as his critics think, but rather that to survive, people must organize themselves in a society. Sumner is right.
In her history of liberalism (both classical and otherwise) Helena Rosenblatt relies on a caricature of liberals as radically individualistic and concerned only with material gain. This is an unfortunate mistake.
