Contrast our world with that of the political class. Here, scarcity is nonexistent. While my wife and I struggled over whether or not we could commit financial resources, the politician simply commits our resources for us. No questions asked.
The free market could deal more effectively with contagious diseases, just as it beats the government when it comes to computers, cars, and crops.
DiLorenzo's well-argued and forcefully written book shows that the struggle against the "Lincoln cult" is a vital part of the case for liberty.
Mises knew why abandoning the principle of sound money would be so problematic: "In the opinion of the public, more inflation and more credit expansion are the only remedy against the evils which inflation and credit expansion have brought about."
They have merchants of death in their districts that get the cash. They benefit from the huge spike in "homeland security" funds, and so have every incentive to keep the level of war hysteria high and growing. They are part of the state apparatus, and war is the health of the state. They too have much to lose from ending the war and much to gain from keeping some form of the war going.
This is what makes The Lord of the Rings a much better means for conceptualizing the ideas of freedom than Atlas Shrugged.
There are two main branches of the sciences of human action: praxeology and history.
Mises states that the fundamental logical relations are not subject to proof or disproof.
Why?
The fact that animals can obviously not petition for their "rights" is part of their nature, and part of the reason why they are clearly not equivalent to, and do not possess the rights of, human beings.
But what you are not permitted to do in a free market is use violence in the attempt to create an artificial scarcity, which is all that IP legislation really does.
