Something Is Rotten in the (Welfare) State of Denmark: A Hazlittian Analysis of Danish Welfarism

Abstract

This essay examines the enduring relevance of Henry Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson in analyzing contemporary economic and social issues. It first applies Hazlitt’s lesson to three prominent contemporary issues: protectionism, technophobia, and the economic fallacies surrounding war. The essay then shifts focus to the Danish welfare state (velfærdsstat), often celebrated as a paragon of the Nordic model of social democracy.

The Relevance of Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson for Current Economic Discourse

Abstract

This essay analyzes Hazlitt’s Economics in One Lesson and centers on two themes. First, Hazlitt’s “One lesson” provides a thorough application of counterfactual analysis as developed by Hülsmann (2003, 57-102) to various economic matters. In relating the factual to its counterfactual alternatives, Hazlitt points to those effects of an event that are not seen since they remain unrealized. He applies these principles particularly to government policies, highlighting the opportunity costs of interventionism and government spending.

Free-Market Reforms in Argentina and Chile: A Comparative Analysis of Structural Challenges and Long-Term Prospects

Abstract

This paper analyzes the economic reforms in Argentina under President Javier Milei, drawing comparisons with Chile’s free-market transformations of the 1970s and 1980s implemented by the Chicago Boys. Using Hazlitt’s principle of evaluating long-term and widespread consequences, the analysis integrates Austrian economics concepts: time-preference rates (Hoppe), the role of institutions (Hayek), and capital structure (Mises).

Tariffs Bring Pain without Gain

Sen. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama—who formerly made his living as a college football coach—has stepped into the current controversy over President Donald Trump’s tariffs by making a training analogy:

No pain, no gain. That’s what we used to tell our football players. There’s gonna be some pain with tariffs... Democrats get out of the way. Shut up.

He added:

Gangsters, Terrorists, and Deep State Judicial Tyranny

The primary purpose of the federal judiciary is to make sure that anything the federal government does is almost never, ever, ruled to be unconstitutional. This is Hamilton’s constitutional regime. A believer in unlimited government, Alexander Hamilton’s constitutional belief was that the constitution can and should be used as a rubber stamp on unlimited government — as long as the government is run by “well behaved” politicians like himself, he insisted.

Ludovico Lumicisi is an undergraduate engineering student at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU).