[This article is Part 3 of a series. See Part 1 and Part 2.]

Ludwig von Mises’s contributions stood out against the background we outlined previously in mainstream international economic theory. Mises did not employ an analytical distinction between domestic and international trade, and unlike his contemporary scholars, he did not separate the real and monetary realms of the economy in his analysis. Quite the contrary, his lifelong research program was centered on bridging what he believed to be an artificial theoretical separation.

One of the more interesting reactions to the Green New Deal (GND) came courtesy of Ross Douthat. Writing for the New York Times, Douthat offered “one cheer for the Green New Deal,” two cheers shy of a full endorsement.

When Britons voted on June 23, 2016 on whether or not to leave the EU there was no discussion of a “hard or soft Brexit”. These terms were invented after Brexit passed by a surprisingly large margin and the mostly anti-Brexit Tory Party government, especially its leadership, decided that it needed to negotiate the terms of leaving. Brexit supporters regard such terms as betraying the 2016 Brexit referendum itself. These 17.4 million Britons undoubtedly believed that Brexit would mean exactly that: Britain would no longer be governed by any EU laws, regulations, etc.

In her essay “Redeeming the Industrial Revolution“ Wendy McElroy notes how industrialization provided choices to women which had never been available before:

January’s report on fertility from the CDC set off a new wave of speculation in the media about the alleged “fertility crisis.”

An old friend of mine, who taught political science for 25 years at the University of Colorado, was known to tell his students that the real reason they were there was to marry people from the right social class.