Anthony de Jasay, an important free market economist and political philosopher passed away on January 23. Born in Hungary in 1925, he studied at Nuffield College, Oxford, where he was a protégé of I.M.D. Little, a leading authority on welfare economics. Like Little, de Jasay was an astringent critic, and he often assailed his fellow classical liberals, such as Friedrich Hayek, as well as opponents of the free market. Almost everyone wrongly took for granted, he thought, that the state is necessary. In fact, those who control the state are self-interested actors, not neutral umpires.

The necessity to have unanimity in the European Council on so-called “sensitive” issues, including tax policy, has been controversial on the European level for many years. With plans to reform the EU and move forward on integration efforts, the European Commission has stated clearly ever since the Brexit vote that member states should think about giving up on the last remnants of unanimity votes. Instead, qualified majority voting (QMV), i.e.

It is often said by cynical economists and political commentators, usually of the right or libertarian persuasion, that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. There is no more odious and damaging economic policy that comes from the heart than rent control. For years, limiting the cost of living spaces was done at the local level, but one West Coast state aims to be the first to implement statewide rent controls.

One problem that consumers must consistently face is the problem of gaining reliable knowledge about products and services they may wish to buy. After all, knowledge in society is diffuse, and it’s hard to know which information is reliable. Is product X a quality product or not? And who can be trusted to give us reliable information on the matter. Free exchange, however, often makes it possible for people to benefit from knowledge they don’t personally possess. What’s more, many consumers in the marketplace offer this information freely to other consumers.

The Raiders are coming to Las Vegas and the excitement is palpable. Three-quarters of a billion dollars of taxpayer money used as Raider bait seemingly hasn’t upset anyone. The arrival of the NFL after the Golden Knights’ first NHL season has local real estate salespeople, developers, casino owners and business folk dreaming of cashing in on a local professional sports bonanza.

Capitalism has often been described by as “a system of competition” by its adversaries, or a system “based on competition.” Naturally, this assertion is usually coupled with a spirited oration on how this “tooth n’ nail” competition psychologically corrupts us – pitting man against man in a “race to the bottom.”

[In this chapter from Man, Economy, and State, Murray Rothbard explains how government employees consume productive resources, while both taxes and government spending distort the economy.]

The longing for the socialist dream comes in part from the great success of capitalism as an engine of prosperity. From the nineteenth century onwards, the entrepreneurial economy created prosperity on a scale that had never been seen before in history.The socialists, however, believed economic success would become even greater in a society of egalitarian redistribution. The socialists expect that under their rule, the economy would become more productive and society more just.