In 1902, writes George Leef, those who aspired to enter the legal profession could take several different routes. One was simply to study law individually. A second route was to apprentice yourself into a law firm and learn what you needed to know in that environment--as Clarence Darrow did. The third option was to go to law school.
Why are Maine farmers dumping milk? The way to respond to falling prices, writes Robbie Blevins, is to offer a better product more efficiently. The signal of the need to do so is a feature of free enterprise, the system in which the consumer—which is to say, the common person—is king.
To speak about average prices is like talking about average precipitation to a golfer, writes Chris Mayer. It either rains during a specific time period or it doesn't. There is no average that is anyway useful for an acting human being on a golf course. The only information that counts is what it is doing right now while he is teeing off. It is the same with prices.
It was September 11, and panicked customers were flocking to the two gas stations Bobbie Jean Harvey owns near Midland, Mich., to top off their tanks in case the supply of gas was disrupted. It became apparent that sales on September 11 were going to be above average. In hindsight, however, Ms. Harvey wishes she had closed her stations.
As oil and gasoline prices begin their annual rite of spring, I am waiting for another rite that occurs among media pundits and some economists—who ought to know better. That particular ritual is the accusation levied against oil companies that they are "manipulating the market" in order to force up prices. Like the oil companies two decades ago and electricity producers and distributors during the California crisis, the mantra is going to be repeated ad nauseum, "They are manipulating the market. That is why prices are increasing."
In deregulating its power system, California seems to have made every mistake possible, writes William Anderson. For starters, it forced utilities to buy power at market rates while capping what they could charge their retail customers. This devastated the utilities. It also sent exactly the wrong signal to consumers, who had no incentive to conserve.
Individuals and foundations have sunk millions of dollars into D.C. "think tanks" and seminars, writes William Anderson, in hopes of teaching economics to those who are in positions of political leadership. Lest we be tempted to think this is working, read the latest U.S. Senate "investigative report" on oil prices. The political classes and their media allies have cooked up yet another conspiracy theory on the evils of private enterprise.
It is this economic law of exchange—not bombs, government spending, regulations, loose credit from the Fed, or stock-market scams—that is the source of wealth, health, and security in our world. Politicians care nothing about it because voluntarism is not what they are about. But economic law always has its revenge. It brought down the Soviet Union, and it will do the same to any state or institution that believes itself exempt.
A new study has been seized upon by proponents as a "proof text" against critics of living-wage laws. The success claimed for such policies by that study, however, is, in fact, far less than implied by the innumerable "Living Wage Laws Reduce Poverty" stories it has spawned. At most, the study only shows that some low-income workers may gain more than other low-income workers lose.
Charging $4, $5, or even $100 for a gallon of gasoline is not a crime; rather, it is a logical response to what buyers and sellers perceive to be the current market situation.
