Practically all critiques of markets are fundamentally ignorant and never address the actual issue. And they’ve been ignorant in the same way for about (at least?) a century. The so-called “market socialist” response to Mises’ claim that socialism (the common/public ownership of the means of production) is impossible illustrates this.
Trade is a key to a rising standard of living in society, especially for those at the bottom of the economic ladder.
In every exchange, both sides benefit from their own individual subjective perspective. That’s because at the moment of the trade, they are both giving up something they value less for something they value more. Thus, trade enables people to improve their standard of living. The greater the ability of people to trade, the better off they are.
It is broadly accepted that out of Enlightenment thinking came many of the “goods” of our society; goods economic, political, and social. Goods ranging from the material wealth and the technology we enjoy to classical liberalism and libertarianism. It is on the latter that I will focus.
Obituaries for the late Princeton economist Alan Krueger have combined praise for his personal character with implicit (or explicit) endorsement of his research approach.
Well, at least they’re now being honest about it. A headline this week in The Guardian reads: “Ending climate change requires the end of capitalism. Have we got the stomach for it?”
Keynote AERC lectures and selected panels can be watched live at mises.org/live
Our online schedule includes (Central Time Zone):
Randall Holcombe (Florida State University) | Political Capitalism: How Economic and Political Power Is Made and Maintained
In recent years, the controversial subject of global warming and a potential “climate disaster” has received a lot of media attention.
There are progressive politicians who are now arguing that unless profound changes in public policy are made to reduce worldwide carbon emissions, we face an impending world-wide climate related catastrophe.
