By 1989, it had become apparent to all — everyone except the CIA, of course — that the Soviet economy, and thus the Soviet state was in very deep trouble. 

Last week in Arizona, Governor Ducey signed into law HB 2014, which removes state-level taxation of gold and silver coins, and moves the state further toward treating gold and silver as simply another form of legal tender. By removing taxation, the legislation facilitates the more widespread purchasing and selling of gold and silver both an a hedge against inflation and as a medium of exchange. 

Last month, Brink Lindsey of the Cato Institute wrote an article arguing that libertarians should abandon any arguments regarding natural rights. As Lindsey sees it, the concept of natural rights is an “intellectual dead end” and that adherence to natural rights arguments should be abandoned.

Americans have been fighting over health insurance reform for ages. For example, 25 years ago, in 1992, over 200 congressional health care bills were introduced.

Unfortunately, while the rhetoric has focused on insurance, such as how many would supposedly gain or lose insurance if some change was implemented, that has not been the real issue. Income redistribution has. As Henry Aaron estimated that year, implementing a comprehensive national health insurance system would redistribute more income than any single national policy then in existence.

One of the most interesting discussions in the field of monetary theory concerns the role central banks play in the economy. There are multiple views regarding different issues: from questioning the mere existence of the central bank to the actual role a central bank should take. An engaging issue is whether the central bank — if one is justified — should be autonomous from political power. Another issue of great significance regards the form the central bank’s interventions should take: Should the central bank’s governing body have its own discretion?

According to the president of the Federal Reserve of St. Louis James Bullard the current level of US prices is noticeably lower than what it would be if the Federal Reserve had delivered on its 2% inflation target, calling the trend “worrisome.” The yearly growth rate of the consumer price index (CPI) eased in April to 2.2% from 2.4% in March. 

San Francisco President John Williams spoke last Sunday, reiterating his position that the Fed would hike 3 times this year. Looking only at the inflation rate (as measured by the PCE) and the unemployment levels, the Fed considers its dual mandate as having been met. On the surface this justifies a rate hike, according to mainstream economic orthodoxy.

Nobel prize winning economist Robert Shiller recently revisited the Housing Bubble in an article published in the New York Times (“How Tales of ‘Flippers’ Led to a Housing Bubble,” May 18, 2017). He is troubled by the lack of consensus on what caused the bubble-bust that left the world mired in the financial crisis.

When we think about terrorism we most often think about the horrors of a Manchester-like attack, where a radicalized suicide bomber went into a concert hall and killed dozens of innocent civilians. It was an inexcusable act of savagery and it certainly did terrorize the population.

What is less considered are attacks that leave far more civilians dead, happen nearly daily instead of rarely, and produce a constant feeling of terror and dread. These are the civilians on the receiving end of US and allied bombs in places like Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia, and elsewhere.

According to the Nobel Laureate in Economics, Milton Friedman, the root of the business cycle is the fluctuations in the growth rate of money supply.

Friedman held that what is required for the elimination of these cycles is for central bank policy makers to aim at a fixed rate of growth of money supply: