Abstract

This essay analyzes Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson and centers on two themes. First, Hazlitt’s “One lesson” provides a thorough application of counterfactual analysis as developed by Hülsmann (2003, 57-102) to various economic matters. In relating the factual to its counterfactual alternatives, Hazlitt points to those effects of an event that are not seen since they remain unrealized. He applies these principles particularly to government policies, highlighting the opportunity costs of interventionism and government spending.

Abstract

This paper analyzes the economic reforms in Argentina under President Javier Milei, drawing comparisons with Chile’s free-market transformations of the 1970s and 1980s implemented by the Chicago Boys. Using Hazlitt’s principle of evaluating long-term and widespread consequences, the analysis integrates Austrian economics concepts: time-preference rates (Hoppe), the role of institutions (Hayek), and capital structure (Mises).

Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama—who formerly made his living as a college football coach—has stepped into the current controversy over President Donald Trump’s tariffs by making a training analogy:

No pain, no gain. That’s what we used to tell our football players. There’s gonna be some pain with tariffs... Democrats get out of the way. Shut up.

He added:

The demonetisation of gold is easy enough. The difficult thing is to find something to take its place.—Charles Rist (1938)

During Trump 1.0, working for a home builder, I learned that wholesalers raise the price of lumber at the first mention of tariffs. Trump 2.0’s schizophrenic tariff policies may seem to have caused no harm yet, however, builders are no doubt already feeling the pinch.

Over the weekend, President Trump ordered dozens of air raids on many targets spread around the country of Yemen. The US military claimed the strikes killed “multiple” leaders of the group Ansar Allah, better known as the Houthis.

The primary purpose of the federal judiciary is to make sure that anything the federal government does is almost never, ever, ruled to be unconstitutional. This is Hamilton’s constitutional regime. A believer in unlimited government, Alexander Hamilton’s constitutional belief was that the constitution can and should be used as a rubber stamp on unlimited government — as long as the government is run by “well behaved” politicians like himself, he insisted.

[For an audio version of this talk, see March 20th’s episode of Radio Rothbard.]

Over the weekend President Trump ordered a massive military operation against the small country of Yemen. Was Yemen in the process of attacking the United States? No. Did the President in that case go to Congress and seek a declaration of war against the country? No. The fact is, Yemen hadn’t even threatened the United States before the bombs started falling.