≡ Menu

My Correspondence on Racial and Sexual Discrimination (Well, Sort Of) With Steve Pinker

I developed an acquaintance with him since he used my book Defending I in a course of his he taught at Harvard. He has not so far responded to my query (hence, the “sort of” since this is so far one way), but I’m always hopeful. (I slightly edited this letter of mine to him).

From: Walter Block [mailto:wblock@loyno.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 9:07 PM
To: ‘pinker@wjh.harvard.edu’ Subject: query

Dear Steve:

I watched with great interest this short presentation of yours on racism, sexism, and anarcho capitalism.

Steven Pinker: Political Correctness Might be Redpilling America

If I had to summarize your talk, you were saying that you can’t logically deduce an ought from an is. Fine. I have no problem with that.

However, I’m a racist and a sexist (as a libertarian, I believe we have a right to discriminate against blacks and females, and anyone else we want for that matter) and an anarcho capitalist (I believe this is the only moral and efficacious system; taxation, the sine qua non of government, is necessarily a rights violation). You oppose all three. But, nothing you said leads to that conclusion either. Do you agree (not that I expect you can defend your position on all three in a few minutes)?

PS. You’re walking down a dark street late at night. The road breaks into two forks. Down one are standing 3 young black men. In the other direction are 3 young white men. All else is ceteris paribus insofar as this scenario is concerned. Stipulate that you take the latter path. Are you not judging these three individuals on the basis of the groups to which they belong, contrary to what you said in your presentation (given that the black crime rate is much higher than the one for whites)?

Best regards,


Walter E. Block, Ph.D.
Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics
Loyola University New Orleans
6363 St. Charles Avenue, Box 15, Miller Hall 318
New Orleans, LA 70118
tel: (504) 864-7934

Walter Block Publications

Skype: Walter.Block4

Block, Walter E. 2017. “C’mon Down To New Orleans; The Water’s Fine. Enroll at Loyola University.” June 27;

C’mon Down To New Orleans; The Water’s Fine. Enroll at Loyola University

Loyola Economics Students Published Widely in Refereed Journals; http://www.loyno.edu/news/story/2017/7/17/3962

Block, Walter. 2017. “The Best Place to Study Undergraduate Economics.” June 30; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2017/06/the-best-place-to-study-undergraduate.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Wenzel, Robert. 2017. Interview with Walter E. Block. “The Inside Scoop on Studying Economics at Loyola University-New Orleans” September 3;

Top Ten Contemporary Academics Helping The Political Right (#8)

100 Most Influential Libertarians: A Newsmax/FreedomFest List (#46)


4:38 pm on January 12, 2018

Please follow and like us:

States’ Rights? For Liberals?? Say It Isn’t So, Progressives!

Isn’t it amazing? What with Jeff Sessions attempting to over-rule states which have legalized marijuana in one form or another, our friends on the left are boiling mad. They now in effect favor states’ rights! (Most states that have done so are located on the two coasts of our country. With the exception of Colorado, very few if any are located in “flyover country” and Colorado is pretty “progressive.”) ‘Twasn’t too long ago that this doctrine of State’s rights was considered “racist” by these people. How the worm turns. I suppose it depends upon whose ox is being gored, to mix my metaphors.


7:51 pm on January 7, 2018

Please follow and like us:

The Hayekian Triangle and Austrian Business Cycle Theory

Dear J: I have published a fair bit (see below) on Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT).

But I am most proud of this publication of mine:

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2006. “On Hayekian Triangles.” Procesos De Mercado: Revista Europea De Economia Politica; Vol. III, No. 2, Fall, pp. 39-141; http://tinyurl.com/2zkvj7; http://mises.org/journals/scholar/block18.pdf; http://www.academia.edu/1359916/On_Hayekian_Triangles

When it appeared in print, I honestly thought it would make quite a stir, at least amongst Austrian macroeconomists, if not in the general profession. I thought this article so good, so devastating to the Hayekian triangle, that ABCT would have to be rerouted in an entirely different direction, taught in a very different way. None of this remotely occurred. So, as with all of my “babies,” I tried to get people interested in it. I sent it to quite a few Austrian macroeconomists, asking them to react to it. In the event, I failed. Dismally. No one, no one at all, has ever commented on it, to the best of my knowledge. It is now twelve years old, and no rejoinder to it has ever been published. It has fallen down the “memory hole.”

So, as I’m sure you can appreciate, I am delighted with this letter of yours, and astounded by the very generous offer you make. I can’t speak for my co-author Bill Barnett, but I expect he would also be delighted to join me in the venue you suggest. I don’t need a penny to do so. If I have to get on a plane to give a speech, or make a presentation, I charge big bucks, since that means 2-3 days of lost productivity. But, a skype of one hour costs me only, wait for it, one hour. I would vastly prefer that someone, anyone, would publish a response to this article. Speaking about it on a radio show would not be as good, since this paper involves very technical issues in praxeology. But your suggestion is immensely better than nothing at all. I expect that Tom Woods reads LRC every day. But I shall indeed send this to him, just in case.

Hi Dr. Block, I attempted to contact/write to Tom Woods in October 2017 via his website with a request to sponsor a “Tom Woods Show” episode about your paper on Hayekian Triangles for $1,000. I have no idea whether or not he read and considered my offer, but at this point I wanted to forward the same idea to you, and if it was one you wished to pursue, allow you to do so. What I wrote to Tom is below should you have any desire to forward it to him. Regards, J

Dear Tom, I would like to make a request/offer for a guest and show topic for the Tom Woods show. The subject is something I personally want to see exhibited to a wider audience, and I’d be willing to make a monetary contribution of $1,000 to see it happen. Specifically, Walter Block and Bill Barnett published a paper in 2006 called “On Hayekian Triangles,” which raised 14 objections to the triangle. When I first read this paper while in college, I was completely convinced by it. I had previously read both Man Economy and State, as well as Huerta De Soto’s explanation of the structure of production, and despite significant mental effort, I could not quite get home on those explanations. This paper solidified my reservations and pointed out the logical inconsistencies of it. In particular, it made me question the fundamental assumption of economic growth implying greater “roundaboutness” i.e. levels of production. I wrote to Mr. Block in 2016 to see if there was any further discussion or papers on the subject matter (the answer was no), and he ultimately posted the exchange here: https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/austrian-business-cycle-theory-hayekian-rothbardian-triangle/

If Barnett and Block are correct in their objections, it means ABCT needs to be structurally (pun intended) recrafted from the now standard text-book explanation. For me, the biggest motivator is that I don’t see that the triangle can actually be applied to the real world, and I genuinely believe it hinders ABCT growth and acceptance until it is fixed/abandoned/replaced. I don’t know what it should be replaced with (if anything), and the subject matter has been gnawing at me off and on for the past eight years. I’m puzzled by the fact that no one else is thinking/writing about the matter, and the only explanation I can come up with is that Block and Barnett’s objections are not a well-known enough, and thus the reason for my email. I guess just to reiterate, if you are in fact willing/interested in doing the show I’m requesting, I’m genuinely willing to pay the $1,000, as I realize you (and/or Walter’s) time and efforts are limited and of immense value.

Final unrelated item (if you’ve made it this far in my email): Thank you for all you do, Tom. I’ve been following your work, reading your books, and watching your speeches since my introduction to Austrian Economics about eight years ago. I think you’re advancing the cause of Austrian Economics and libertarianism about as much as any one person possibly could. Very Sincerely, J

J, as promised, here are my publications on ABCT:

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2005. “Professor Tullock on Austrian Business Cycle Theory,” Advances in Austrian Economics, Vol. 8, pp. 431-443

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2006. “On Gallaway and Vedder on Stabilization Policy” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. Vol. 9, No. 1, spring, pp. 57-81; http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae9_1_5.pdf

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2006A. “Tyler Cowen on Austrian Business Cycle Theory: A Critique.” New Perspectives on Political Economy, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 26-84; http://pcpe.libinst.cz/nppe/2_2/nppe2_2_2.pdf; http://pcpe.libinst.cz/nppe/

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2006B. “On Hayekian Triangles.” Procesos De Mercado: Revista Europea De Economia Politica; Vol. III, No. 2, Fall, pp. 39-141; http://tinyurl.com/2zkvj7; http://mises.org/journals/scholar/block18.pdf; http://www.academia.edu/1359916/On_Hayekian_Triangles

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2007. “Saving and Investment: A Praxeological Approach.” New Perspectives on Political Economy, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 129 – 138;
http://pcpe.libinst.cz/nppe/3_2/nppe3_2_1.pdf;; http://www.academia.edu/1359832/Saving_and_Investment_A_Praxeological_Approach
no future goods (fn 16)

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2008. “On Hummel on Austrian Business Cycle Theory.” Reason Papers Vol. 30, Fall, pp. 59-90; http://www.reasonpapers.com/pdf/30/rp_30_4.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2001. “Yes, We Have No Chaff: A Reply to Wagner’s “Austrian Business Cycle Theory: Saving the Wheat While Discarding the Chaff,” Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, Vol. 4, No. 1, Spring, pp. 63-73. //www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae4_1_4.pdf

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett, II. 2007. “On Laidler on Austrian Business Cycle Theory.” Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 20, No. 1, March, pp. 43-61; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11138-006-0004-y; http://www.gmu.edu/rae/archives/Vol20_1_2007/4-Block_Barnett.pdf; http://loyno.academia.edu/WalterBlock/Papers/1403247/On_Laidler_on_Austrian_Business_Cycle_Theory

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2007. “The Austrian Tent? A Rejoinder to Gallaway and Vedder” Corporate Ownership & Control, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 233-234;
http://www.virtusinterpress.org/additional_files/journ_coc/issues/COC_(Volume_4_Issue_3_Spring_2007_Continued).pdf; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228286918_The_Austrian_Tent_A_Rejoinder_to_Gallaway_and_Vedder?ev=prf_pub

Block, Walter E., William Barnett II and Joseph Salerno. 2006. “Relationship between wealth or income and time preference is empirical, not apodictic: critique of Rothbard and Hoppe,” Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 69-80; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11138-006-6094-8; http://www.gmu.edu/rae/archives/VOL19_1_2006/4-Block_Barnett_Salerno.pdf


4:32 pm on January 6, 2018

Please follow and like us:

Gary North’s Suggested Project: the Legacy of My Publications

From: T
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 2:02 PM
To: Dr Walter Block
Subject: Consolidating Walter Block’s Scattered Legacy

Dr. Block,

I have just finished reading Gary North’s article, subject as above.


I wholeheartedly agree with his advice and recommend you do as he suggests. I am not what one would generally consider to be a wealthy man, but I shall pledge $100 towards the effort of preserving and cataloging the legacy of your writings. As the project progresses, and the scope and costs are better known, I would consider making further donations. If you consider the project to be a worthy one, and decide to progress, please let me know how to make my donation. T

Dear T:

Thanks for your good wishes and your offer of financial support. I shall indeed do exactly as my friend Gary North has suggested.

You are not the only one who has offered to donate money to this effort. I appreciate that, greatly, but it is unnecessary. I have research assistants at Loyola who can do the heavy lifting, and I am determined to take on this project.

Instead, I urge you and all others who have made similar offers, please donate these funds to the Mises Institute – LewRockwell.com. You can go here to do so:


My reasoning for this is as follows:

1. I may work for Loyola, and have done for 18 years, but I have been associated with the Mises Institute for the entirety of its existence, and it is my spiritual home
2. Very few people on this list would have even seen Dr. North’s sweet and kind essay about me and my work in the first place were it not for the fact that it was posted on LewRockwell.com
3. Every penny that anyone sends me on this matter I will immediately transfer to the MI in any case. So, why not cut out the middleman, e.g., me, and send your money to them, directly? There are tax advantages to doing this. They are a charity, legally speaking, I am not; they have tax exempt status, I do not. T, thanks once again.


10:53 pm on January 5, 2018

Please follow and like us:

Here is a note I just wrote to a friend of mine, and many times co author of mine: It’s good we can be on good terms with each other, no, excellent terms, even though we disagree, sharply, on some (well, one) very important issue. I think that’s a compliment to both of us. I’ve found very few people who can do this, and I pride myself on being one of the ones able to do so.

If ever we are going to get that proverbial one millionth of an inch closer to the Truth with a capital “T,” it will only be through vigorous, unrestricted argument. (John Stuart Mill in his On Liberty, and Hans Hoppe, in his work on argumentation ethics, have made important contributions to my appreciation of this statement). I really can’t see any other way that this has even a ghost of a chance. And, yet, it is so important. A friend of mine once told me that in Heaven, all will be understood, and that our life here on earth, if it is to be heavenly, must therefore be focused on learning. I dedicate my life to this sort of thing. How else can we learn other than through spirited exchange of ideas?

All too often I lose friends who just can’t stand the heat of no-holds-barred (intellectually of course, always politely) arguing. I greatly regret it. I have far fewer friends than I would like to have because, sometimes, no, often, no always, I just can’t keep my big mouth shut. Nor do I intend to change. Old dogs, new tricks…

Nowadays, on college campuses, the heckler’s veto is justified on the ground of stopping hate speech. All readers of this blog will immediately see through that fallacy. But, it has been my unhappy experience that people I like very much become abrupt with me, sometimes drop me as a friend, when I go for the jugular with them. I do so as politely and respectfully as I can, and some of the time, happily, this works; the friendship endures, despite sharp disagreement on one or two issues. I greatly regret when it does not. So, please, if ever you and I get into it hammer and tongs, let us all make a New Year’s Resolution that we will not allow that sort of thing to break up friendships.


1:02 am on January 4, 2018

Please follow and like us:

Are you a donor to the MI or LRC? If so, I urge you to increase your level of contribution. If not, I urge you to join me and become a financial supporter. If you are willing in this way to promote Austrian economics and libertarianism, go here: https://mises.org/giving/campaigns/help-us-pack-more-powerful-punch-5

I have had several congratulatory messages concerning this essay of mine on North Korea:

Block, Walter E. 2018. “Dealing With North Korea.” January 1;

Dealing With North Korea

Most of them limited themselves to thanking me; one even nominated me for Secretary of State. This one, however, is very substantive, very important. It has the ring of truth. I urge everyone to read this insightful message:

—–Original Message—–
From: E
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2018 4:20 PM
To: wblock@loyno.edu
Subject: war is a racket

Dear Dr. Block:

I applaud your proposal for a new peace with N. Korea. Unfortunately, I don’t believe it is possible because there is too much money to be made by those who are in the business of wars in far off lands. In the 1990’s I worked for a NASA lab that created a computer war game simulation. Every 6 months or so, I and dozens of others would travel to Seoul for wargames with the S. Koreans and Americans. I was there to monitor their computer networks, which were somewhat flakey. I spent 3 weeks at the US base in Seoul. This base is about 1×1 mile and has a hotel, several fancy restaurants, a bowling alley, football and baseball fields, etc. Since the on-base hotel was full, I was put up at the Hilton Hotel in a private room. All my expenses were paid for; I could ride a free bus from the hotel to the base, or hire a cab and be reimbursed. In addition to all this, I was also getting $105 CASH per diem, to spend on anything I wanted ­ or just save tax free. And that’s in 1990, when $105 was still a lot of dough. I had such a great time, I asked to be sent back.

However, instead they next sent me to Germany at a place called, get this: “The Warrior Preparation Center”. The networks there were much better and I didn’t need to do anything. I asked if I could go home early, but they said no and told me to just go have fun. I spent much of my time touring Europe in my rental car. Driving the Autobahn at 110 mph was quite an adventure. I was set up at a nice place that served free breakfast. At night, I would go to various fancy restaurants with my co-workers. I could also go onto the air-force base next store and buy gas for my car at 20% of the cost outside, thus saving my per diem for more enjoyable things. All this, of course, was on the taxpayer’s nickel. For this reason, I don’t think you will ever see peace in your time or even our children’s time. There simply is too much money to be made. As S. Butler said, “War is a racket”. Regards, E


7:47 pm on January 1, 2018

Please follow and like us:

All Money Comes From the Government? Ha!

From: J
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2017 1:01 PM
To: wblock@loyno.edu
Subject: A bizarre economic theory

Hello Prof Block, I’ve recently run across an acquaintance who follows “Modern Monetary Theory”. While most of what he writes in the internet forum I’m part of can be easily enough dealt with, he has come up with a claim that while I know is bizarre, I’m at a loss as to how to proceed. He claims “all money comes from the government” as his foundational premise. As a result, he believes taxation exists only to soak money out of the private sector when there is too much money there. Obviously the correct amount of money is a subjective claim, and the value of money is determined by quantity of money and quantity of goods and services and the ability to redeem said goods and services using the money. But all money comes from the government? To me this look like “prison normal”, where conditions have been abnormal for so long people have become accustomed to the abnormal conditions and assume they are normal. We have had fiat currency for so long people imagine it is some sort of magical creation of the government. What would you say to the premise that “all money comes from the government”?

Dear J: I would say that your acquaintance should read this essay: Rothbard, Murray N. 1963, 1985, 1990. What Has Government Done to Our Money? Auburn, AL.: Mises Institute; http://www.mises.org/rothbard/rothmoney.pdf

Are you a donor to the MI or LRC? If so, I urge you to increase your level of contribution. If not, I urge you to join me and become a financial supporter. If you are willing in this way to promote Austrian economics and libertarianism, go here: https://mises.org/giving/campaigns/help-us-pack-more-powerful-punch-5


2:11 am on December 31, 2017

Please follow and like us:

This is part III of my series on my friend Hans Hoppe.
Here are the two other parts:
1. https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/defense-prof-hoppe/
2. https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/defense-prof-hoppe-part-ii/

From: R
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 5:25 PM
To: Walter Block
Subject: A Defense of Hans Hermann Hoppe

Thank you Dr. Block for writing the Defense of Hans Hermann Hoppe. I too have learned immensely from his genius work, across a broad spectrum of disciplines. Political economy being chief among them. To my disgust, I have read and listened to his detractors ad nauseum for years. There are certain libertarian functions that I refuse to attend anymore as the Hoppe mudslinging begins almost from the onset. Porcfest chief among these.

Recently, I have adopted the Doug Casey approach. I’ll mention a paper from Hoppe to another anarchist or libertarian, if the word “fascist” or Nazi pops up, discussion over. It’s extremely hurtful, personally, as I had lived in Germany, during and after the Cold War, and find these epitaphs quite offensive. In agreement, we as freedom loving people should find a way to get along with our fellow travelers. The goal of reducing state power and influence is common among us. This should be our prime directive, not bickering over someone’s libertarian purism. I’ll stand with Rand, Ron, Hans, Jeffrey, yourself or anyone else who is trying to curtail the state. In my opinion this is the only way we’re going to get from here to there. Thanks again for your brilliant work as well!

Dear R: Thanks for your important comment on my friend Prof. Hans Hermann Hoppe. To some extent, the success of his career can be calculated by the quantity and “quality” of his detractors. A similar measure applies, too, to his mentors, Murray N. Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises. All three have been excoriated by massive numbers of economists, journalists, philosophers, intellectuals who really should have known better. This is all to Hans’ credit. This is a feather in his cap. You are quite right to characterized the contribution of Prof. Hoppe as that of a “genius.” In my own mind, Hoppe’s work reminds me of the music of Johann Sebastian Bach; both of them are: brilliant, beautiful, relentless, logical, rigorous, uncompromising. It is an honor for me to be able to call him my friend.

Are you a donor to the MI or LRC? If so, I urge you to increase your level of contribution. If not, I urge you to join me and become a financial supporter. If you are willing in this way to promote Austrian economics and libertarianism, go here: https://mises.org/giving/campaigns/help-us-pack-more-powerful-punch-5


3:58 pm on December 28, 2017

Please follow and like us:

Free Trade

From: T
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2017 11:58 AM
To: wblock@loyno.edu
Subject: Subject: Economists Warn of Trump Trade War

Dr. Block, Ricardo seems to indicate that mobility of capital would have a detrimental effect on the living standards of persons remaining in the country with high relative wages…unless they were willing to emigrate. “Under such circumstances the wine and cloth should both be made in Portugal, and therefore that the capital and labor of England…should be removed to Portugal for that purpose. (Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, On Foreign Trade, p95).” He also seems to defend his immobility of capital assumption that is at the core of his theory of comparative advantage with the following: “Experience, however, shows that the fancied or real insecurity of capital, when not under the immediate control of its owner, together with the natural disinclination which every man has to quit the country of his birth and connections, and entrust himself, with all his habits fixed, to a strange government and new laws, check the emigration of capital.” It seems that the immobility of capital assumption does not hold up well in the context of modern economies and the transnational corporate model. My question for you is this: How do I rebut the protectionist argument that, in lieu of modern capital mobility, free trade will result in the emigration of America’s capital until such point that the U.S.’s wages will achieve parity with the rest of the world? Thanks again. T

Dear T: Land, too, is capital. It is a bit difficult to move land from one country to another, even in this modern day. “… wine and cloth should both be made in Portugal?” If this every started to occur, prices in England would fall, and thus become competitive, at least insofar as its comparative advantage is concerned. Moreover, praxeologically, we know that trade is necessarily beneficial, at least in the ex ante sense, otherwise it simply would not occur. Portugal may have an absolute advantage over England in both goods, but not a comparative advantage. Let’s leave protection to Pat Buchanan, and other economic ignoramuses.


10:03 pm on December 27, 2017

Please follow and like us:

Are you a donor to the MI or LRC? If so, I urge you to increase your level of contribution. If not, I urge you to join me and become a financial supporter. If you are willing in this way to promote Austrian economics and libertarianism, go here: https://mises.org/giving/campaigns/help-us-pack-more-powerful-punch-5

From: D
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2017 3:23 AM
To: wblock@loyno.edu
Subject: Profound Thanks & Homeschooling Question

Dear Professor Block, First and foremost, thank you for the immense amount of literature you have produced over the years – it has been invaluable in my finding of liberty. Secondly, I must confess that whenever I read about the so-called “Catholics” with whom you interact at Loyola University, I am both pained, and joyful. Pained because of the bad name they give to Catholicism, and joyful because, like those who reject the absurd status-quo of left and right in politics, I (along with increasing numbers of young people, similar to the liberty movement) am blessed to have discovered Traditional Catholicism; i.e., Catholicism as it was before the Second Vatican Council – reasoning from first principles, solid philosophy, respecting liturgical and intellectual traditions, etc. Actually, I see significant similarities in both movements, in that they both largely involve a return to principles which our generations of forefathers would have considered so obvious, that they formed a part of Western culture’s DNA for over a thousand years – and yet now are roundly rejected by the mainstream. My question is simple, and relates to material for homeschooling. As I will certainly be homeschooling my children, can you suggest a homeschooling curriculum which incorporates your work, along with the work of other solid libertarians (Hans Hoppe, Murray Rothbard, Ron Paul, Tom Woods, etc.)? My first daughter is not yet one year old, but it is never too early to begin planning for the education of future libertarians. I want to make sure that instead of finding authors like yourself after having been brainwashed by public education, my children are able to encounter the building Blocks (ha.ha.ha) of liberty from a young age. God Bless, and Merry Christmas! P.S. – Thanks to your marketing efforts in response to other questions, I have donated to the Mises Institute this Christmas. Keep up the good work! D

Dear D:

Thanks for your kind comments about my contribution.

The Ron Paul Home School program I think will fill the bill: https://int.search.myway.com/search/GGmain.jhtml?p2=%5EBA5%5Exdm126%5ETTAB02%5Eca&ptb=6573A256-EF60-4117-A0FD-DA2A6CBAA50E&n=78399bf9&ind=&cn=CA&ln=en&si=49588_Routen-CA-ChromeOld&trs=wtt&brwsid=296488f4-56d2-4240-a111-e07f079ce05e&st=tab&tpr=sc&searchfor=Ron+Paul+homeschool&ots=1514259965978

It is my understanding that Tom Woods and Gary North have made important contributions to this initiative. I confess, I’m not familiar with the actual program. My children are a little too old for it and my grandchildren, too young. When the get a little older, I’ll recommend it to their parents, sight unseen, because anything with the names Paul, North and Woods attached to it will necessarily be very valuable.


10:53 pm on December 25, 2017

Please follow and like us:
Follow by Email