Most economists and economic commentators believe that inflation is defined as general increases in prices of goods and services. Thus, they hold that anything that contributes to price increases sets inflation into motion.
Argentina, the mystery of South America. How could a country that was once the most prosperous in the world now rank seventy-third (see figure below)? It is also in sixth place in the Annual Misery Index. How could this happen? What’s going on now?
In 1944 Mises wrote: Omnipotent Government: The Rise of Total State and Total War. He provided a first-hand account of the horrors of government, something America’s founding fathers were familiar with all too well.
A recent essay on the Mises Wire triggered quite a bit of discussion among a group of Austrian school economists. Paul H. Kupiec and Alex J. Pollock’s “Who Owns Federal Reserve Losses and How Will They Impact Monetary Policy?“ became the focal point for a wide-ranging discussion of monetary issues that got to the heart of our monetary and overall economic future.
In his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Robert Nozick has a chapter named “The Tale of the Slave” in which he explains the nine phases from the most restrictive to more liberating states of slavery. He writes that even though enslaved people have certain forms of self-rule, they are still enslaved. He asks: “Which transition from case 1 to case 9 made it no longer the tale of a slave?”
Most commentary on the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—which overturns Roe v. Wade—has focused on the decision’s effect on the legality of abortion in various states. That’s an important issue. It may be, however, that the Dobbs decision’s effect on political decentralization in the United States is a far bigger deal.
