Murray Rothbard and David Friedman exemplify contrasting styles of libertarian thought, Rothbard argues from principles, while Friedman tends to avoid fixed rules, ever-alert to the benefits and costs of various policies. You will not be surprised that I prefer Rothbard’s approach, but Friedman’s inventive mind merits praise. Despite their different styles of thought, both converged in holding that a non-interventionist foreign policy is best for America, and for a similar reason: the state does things badly.

“A dollar saved in 1913 retains roughly $0.03 of its original purchasing power. The M2 money supply has expanded from approximately $15 billion to over $21 trillion...” 

If Iranian authorities kill protestors, the US will ‘come to their rescue’, Trump says.

While Rothbard masterfully handled the economic history of both the Panic of 1819 and the Great Depression, as well as contributing to

The modern argument for reparations rests on the retroactive application of legal and moral standards that did not exist when slavery was practiced. Slavery in the United States was legal for centuries. Although morally contested, it was not unlawful, and when the institution was abolished, the formerly enslaved were not compensated for their bondage. Their emancipation did not bring financial restitution, nor were slaveholders punished for actions that had been legal under the governing system of the time.