In January, money supply growth hit a new all-time high, rising slightly above September 2020's previous high, and remaining well above growth levels that one year ago would have been considered unthinkable.
We asked some of our writers and scholars to talk about why Rothbard is worth remembering. Here's what they had to say.
The answer lies in audacious economic reforms that favor markets and entrepreneurs: liquidate bad investments, let deflation happen, cut government spending, cut taxes, let wages fall.
Think of Minneapolis and Portland and then apply that model nationwide. Then you have an idea where progressive radicals want to take us.
Much of the harm is disguised by focusing on forecasts of higher aggregate income for the poor. Individuals, on the other hand, are another story.
Using the Mises’s regression theorem, we can infer that it is not possible that money could have emerged because of a government decree as suggested by the modern monetary theory (MMT).
To adopt monasticism before the international fascism we face today would amount not only to seceding but also to ceding everything worth saving to the monsters
If grocery stores were run like public schools, they'd still be in the midst of an extended covid lockdown. Fortunately, though, we have a (mostly) privatized system, with vouchers for low-income shoppers. A similar system for schools would be a far saner choice than what we have now.
Hazlitt takes on a humble objective: to deliver an “unblushingly ‘classical,’ ‘traditional,’ and ‘orthodox’” synthesis of economics. This is the most fitting way to approach the layman, who will only retain a few lessons from an introductory book.
Murray Rothbard was a pioneer in analyzing taxation from an Austrian or causal-realist standpoint. However, he never explicitly engaged the standard theory of deadweight loss from taxation. This article develops the Austrian analysis of taxation further toward this end
