system is matched by the rejection of all concrete measures of the interventionist policy. Sometimes, during discussion of a partial or complete repeal of a logic. To most observers, the thought of returning to classical liberal policies appears so absurd that they rarely bother to give it thought. The defenders be helped. Another popular doctrine works with the mistaken concept of “free competition.” At first, some writers create an ideal of competition that is free and
the market works most effectively, with the efficiency of the process maximized by policy restraint. Like most illnesses, recessions can be “cured” with rest, phrase means “leave it to us” or more bluntly, “leave us alone.” There are many policies that enhance economic recovery and growth, but this standalone cure for the barriers to exit,” such as subsidies and bailouts, is a primary requirement for “competition,” which is seen by most economists as an engine of progress. This is
Here we move in the world of prices, of markets, of supply and demand, of competition, of wage rates, of interest rates, of exchange rates, and whatnot. That the Bohemian spirit of this modern trend in economics and in economic policy. It betrays the new hardboiled happy-go-luckiness, the tendency to live from
insufficient for modern technological needs. The general principles of government policy in this field we have already set forth: (a) leaving the general allocation of meaning when government can dictate the subject and objective of research in any competitive system of private enterprise. The myth has arisen that government a firm to devote its resources in an attempt at speedy development is the spur of competition. And competition means the free, unhampered market. Even in the case of
of 18th-century liberalism he discovered the solutions of the free market, free competition, free private enterprise—that is to say, capitalism—and how at the same policies are the Sozialpolitik of imperial Germany and the New Deal policy of present-day America. But the tragedy was that when the government’s
for engaging in a business, large accumulations of capital have a distinct competitive advantage, and these capitalists could hardly be expected to advocate a and unorganized consumer is forced to pay the higher price resulting from limited competition. Direct taxes differ from indirect taxes not only in the manner of a series of wars and depressions, direct taxation became a fixture of our fiscal policy, and those upon whom it falls must content themselves to whittling down the
[This essay, which exposes the big-government policies of the Hoover administration, was first published in the Saturday Evening at the same source, as with the income tax, which now some states are using in competition with the federal government. Such competition is embarrassing and House Conference on Child Health and Protection said, It is unquestionably better policy to spend more money today in helping the handicapped child to help himself
the pseudo-philosophy that hitherto had been instrumental in shaping the economic policies of the nations. They exploded the old fables: that it is unfair and unjust businessmen from getting rich and to protect the less efficient against the competition of the more efficient; and that to restrict the freedom and the expounded the doctrine of free trade and laissez faire. They paved the way for a policy that no longer obstructed the businessman’s effort to improve and to expand
ready to be tapped. The prime concern for the Keynesian is to decide on economic policy—what should be the economic ends of the State and what means should the State and early modern times, the ancestors of the Keynesians who advocated similar policies also proclaimed that the State could do no wrong. At that time, the king and direct robbery through “progressive” taxation, creating and spending new money in competition with individuals, directing investment, “influencing” consumption—the
have appeared as nothing more than a glorious vanquishing of America’s foreign-policy enemies. We built more bombs than they did, so they finally gave in—the way a Well, let’s think about this. Is it likely that if you close a labor pool to all competition, give that restrictive labor pool the right to use violence to enforce
What is the Mises Institute?
The Mises Institute is a non-profit organization that exists to promote teaching and research in the Austrian School of economics, individual freedom, honest history, and international peace, in the tradition of Ludwig von Mises and Murray N. Rothbard.
Non-political, non-partisan, and non-PC, we advocate a radical shift in the intellectual climate, away from statism and toward a private property order. We believe that our foundational ideas are of permanent value, and oppose all efforts at compromise, sellout, and amalgamation of these ideas with fashionable political, cultural, and social doctrines inimical to their spirit.