The Swedes, we have been told, enjoy free medical care, generous welfare benefits, time off from work, and subsidies for just about everything. According to a recent study, however, the cat is out of the bag: relative to families in the United States, Swedish family income is considerably less.
By granting parties who cannot demonstrate actual harm the legal standing to sue, we have opened the legal pasture to a veritable flood of new grazers, who do not care about the harm they inflict on others whose claims may not only be more pressing but may also have real merit. David Laband explains.
Social Security is not an insurance program. A Social Security "account" bears no legal resemblance whatsoever to a bank checking or saving account. Social Security bestows no contractual rights or any other type of property right on workers. In other words, Social Security as it is currently structured has nothing to do with legally enforceable promises or guarantees.
In this previously unpublished piece, Murray Rothbard argues that the the silliest of demagogues are a great servant of reason, even when mostly in the wrong.
One major reason people are not loyal to the principle of the right to private property is that they have a misconception of its main function. Many think only the wealthy benefit from it. And even if they do not have anything against being rich, they do have something against unfair legal advantages for those who are.
While it is morally reprehensible to hate, in a true free market the freedom of citizens to associate with whom they wish must be upheld and private property rights must be enforced. There should be neither forced association nor forced disassociation. This is the social foundation of the free-market economy.
Robert Kaplan's newest book seems to be, bottom line, a briefing book to justify the switches and turns, contradictions, and conflicting rationales for American foreign policy and the domestic political control to which it is tightly bound, while freeing the government to to do anything it wants, anywhere in the world it wants.
Why is there so much religious passion in the tone of the Microsoft critics? Why is it so difficult to understand that the marketplace is a far better evaluator of Microsoft's product than a federal judge who tries to synthesize, express, and enforce the whims of 20 million consumers whom he's never talked to?
Can there be a right to freedom of speech without that right being firmly based on property rights?
Contrary to popular myth, every Republican president since and including Herbert Hoover has increased the federal government's size, scope, or power. Over the last one hundred years, of the five presidents who presided over the largest domestic spending increases, four were Republicans.
