The fact that such a vacuous and irrelevant example became such a compelling argument for the government restriction of freedom of speech in many other areas is disturbing.
Neo-Spoonerism: there is no treason against the federal government, because the federal government does not abide by the document which it claims as its foundational authority to govern.
The appropriate question is not “Who will build the roads?” but rather “Who will pay for them without taxation?” History suggests the answer is "lots of people" and the "public goods" theory is wrong.
Google says it can only tolerate "accurate" information and has banned LewRockwell.com from its advertising program. This position only makes sense if one makes some faulty assumptions about how information is spread.
Years of bubbles and malinvestment have a downside: the destruction of the productive, wealth-building parts of the economy. And that could mean higher interest rates.
The chaos economy we're witnessing is not the fault of the market economy. Rather prices in some areas of the economy need to rise so high and so fast to harmonize supply and demand that entrepreneurs can hardly keep pace.
It is, ironically, antiscience to ever declare that science is settled. Since man is not omniscient, the future will forever remain unknown, and more data can always falsify current scientific laws.
