Almost Classical

My original title for this posting was a bit presumptuous: Rhetoric of the Liberal Professor Afraid to Debate After reflection, I realize the professor isn't "afraid" to debate an economic issue, but simply doesn't realize there is a debate because his worldview and selection biases screen out other information. At least, that's my theory. Recently, as part of a trend of articles on the dangers of too much political correctness and identity politics on campus, an anonymous "liberal professor" mentioned that a (racist) student wrongly associated Fannie and Freddie with the housing bubble. This example was to show that the professor handled "debates" well in the past. Actually, the example shows quite the opposite: that conservative and libertarian ideas are depicted as racist, mean-spirited, ill-informed, and furthered by ignorant people. Quite simply, the example is a stereotype. Accurate of events or not, this shining example of how...

Watching Senator Bernie Sanders on CNBC last week, I was reminded of why I like him as a person and worry that such an earnest, nice politician (a true rarity) could have such misguided ideas about economics. If only I felt the same about the men and women who tend support more classically liberal policies. I do not trust the politicians with whom I agree on economics, and I adamantly oppose the policies of the few politicians I might trust. Yes, another lousy election season begins, not that they ever end. Here is what Sen. Sanders said that troubles me. It proves he doesn't get market economics or how the areas in which government is most involved are least responsive to customers. 10 questions with Bernie Sanders John Harwood Tuesday, 26 May 2015 | 6:10 AM ET The whole size of the economy and the GDP doesn't matter if people continue to work longer hours for low wages and you have 45 million people living in poverty. You can't just continue growth for the sake ...

Companies are people. And they aren't. This concept of legal personhood , or legally responsible entity, is embodied in the United States Code: 1 U.S.C. §1 (United States Code): In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals; The reason for this artificial legal construct is simple, though many progressives, and more than a few conservatives, fail to understand why the construct is necessary. If corporate entities didn't exist as people, they could not conduct business. Consider everything a company does that an individual does: Buy property. Pay bills. Enter into contracts. Pay individuals (employees and consultants). Register copyrights and patents. Pay taxes and fees. Pay fines… (yes, that matters). Executives come and go, so suggesting t...

I've long argued that it was not unions or government spending that produced the great post-war boom in the United States and much of the Western World. In December 2014, Tim Worstall published a column on The Register ("El Reg") that agrees with my basic theory: we had to rebuild after the war, and the U.S. was fortunate enough to be the one nation not destroyed during the two World Wars. Bring back big gov, right? If only the economics, STUPID, could tell us more Post-WWII growth rates? Paaah http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12/21/bring_back_big_government/ 21 Dec 2014 at 09:00, Tim Worst You don't have to go all that far leftward these days to find someone brandishing economic growth statistics at you. Proving that growth was higher in the 1945-1973 period than it has been in our own more neoliberal age. Thus, of course, we should bring back the signal economic and political policies of those days so that we can speed up growth again. Big Unions, gover...

The Fountainhead (film) (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) When a critique of libertarianism consists primarily of figuratively shouting "Ayn Rand!" and tossing in the Koch brothers, Nietzsche, and Gordon Gecko (a fictional character, nonetheless), you can be assured the author isn't going to address the Nobel economists or noted philosophers associated with libertarianism on the left, right, and center. Instead of discussing the major thinkers of classical liberalism, the author will attack the caricature of "Libertarians" that has little to do with scholarly reflection. Another Would-Be Critic of Libertarianism Takes on a Straw Man - Reason.com How refreshing it would be for someone to set forth the strongest case for libertarianism before attempting to eviscerate it. Sheldon Richman | March 15, 2015  We must face the fact that criticism of the libertarian philosophy in the mass media will most likely misrepresent its target, making the commentary essent...

Success: It's not about money. One of the critiques of "libertarian" and "classical liberalism" I answer is that these philosophical lines encourage greed, especially in the democratic capitalism of the United States. Seeking your own success does not have to correspond to the pursuit of wealth as measured by bank statements and material goods. Authentic  classical liberalism allows me to pursue whatever fulfillment I seek, without a government bureaucrat deciding we have too many artists, or too many doctors. We pursue our dreams — and the market demand determines if we can earn a "good enough" living. And yet, there are cultural pressure in our society to count and tally our success in unhealthy ways. Since childhood I have feared being poor. My family lived in tiny apartments, mobile homes, and small houses. We had "enough" but were always closer to less than more. My wife and I have lost everything. We have been broke. I had n...

Being "smart" (or at least hard-working with the opportunity to learn) matters, regardless of the economic class into which you are born. As even the most progressive, class-conscious scholars have found, a college education (in the STEM fields, ideally) at a good school corresponds well to later economic success.  A year ago, The Atlantic featured this story: Would You Rather Be Born Smart or Rich? http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/12/would-you-rather-be-born-smart-or-rich/281828/ JORDAN WEISSMANN DEC 2 2013, 12:17 PM ET A recent Brookings paper gives reasons for optimism. Over the long term, it finds, smart kids earn more than rich kids. But sadly, there's a big catch. The Brookings paper looked at the relationship between brains, motivation, and economic mobility among a group of youth the government began tracking in 1979. Here's the executive summary: If they were bright and driven, poor kids stood a decent chance of becoming upper-midd...