If allowing markets to operate represents an "ideology" to most people, so be it. I would argue that markets represent a lack of ideology. More importantly, markets provide far and away the most practical approaches to difficult problems like terrorism.
For the Republican elites, it probably seemed like business as usual when the 2016 primary election started. But in a country where people are truly worried about their economic future, the old rules don't apply.
Studies of the improving Cuban culinary scene after Fidel Castro's stepping down from power reminds us of how socialism actually impoverished the people by making their mundane, ordinary lives much more difficult to live.
In February, the money supply fell slightly, but remains steady thanks to a continued influx of Treasury deposits at the Fed.
In the Fed’s desperation to hold off the coming pain, will Yellen start listening to Ben Bernanke and embrace the absurdity of negative interest rates? We are already seeing the consequences of such policy play out in Switzerland, Germany, and Japan.
Imposing restrictions on trade is not a mere academic exercise. It requires government agents, courts, prisons, police, and the whole panoply of the punitive, coercive state. To oppose free trade is to support more jails, fines, regulations, and more.
Every now and then, I get a letter from a reader that is full of great observations. Here is one of them:
Is government spending on infrastructure less of a misallocation than other spending?
Mises: To seek to organize society is just as crazy as it would be to tear a living plant to bits in order to make a new one out of the dead parts.
The Japanese response to negative interest rates was to buy personal safes. The German response is to pull money out of bank accounts and stick it in safe deposit boxes. Both are perfectly understandable reactions to the prospect of having to pay interest to a bank for holding deposits.
