≡ Menu

Conversations with Nathan Fryzek About Austro-libertarianism and Much More

Letter 1

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 5:12 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Damages, A Potential Problem

Dear Dr. Block,

Say we get technology that can measure the Butterfly Effect. Then, I get sued because someone in Kentucky got stuck by lightning because I went on walk last week. How would libertarian law deal with this scenario?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Student: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Dear Nathan:

Read this:

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2008. “Continuums” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics, Vol. 1, pp. 151-166, June; http://www2.units.it/~etica/http://www2.units.it/~etica/2008_1/BLOCKBARNETT.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 2

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:41 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Novel Solution

Dear Walter,

Say we are 95% sure that libertarianism is correct, or that libertarianism is correct in 95% of scenarios.

My compromise is to allow government but to require a 95% vote to pass any law. What do you think of this idea?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Nathan:

I think that libertarianism is 100% correct, and that the state is 100% evil.

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 3

Dear Nathan:

Not wrong. Just that there are unanswered questions. Why do we own ourselves, for example. I’m not sure. But I don’t think any other philosophy has any answer to this either. Ditto for the continuum challenge.

Some readings:

Block, 2016; Dyke and Block, unpublished; Kinsella, 2006; MacIntosh, 2007; Steiner, 1994A, pp. 242-248, 1994B, 2002, 2008; Vallentyne, 2000, 2002, 2008; Vallentyne, Steiner and Otsuka, 2005; Young, 2015

Block, Walter E. 2016. “How we come to own ourselves.” Polish Academich Journal – Societas et Ius Version; Issue 5; http://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/SeI/issue/view/1107/showTochttp://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/SeI/article/view/SEI.2016.001;

Dyke, Jeremiah and Walter E. Block. Unpublished. “‘I Am Here Now’ and Our Claim to Self-Ownership”

Kinsella, N. Stephan. 2006. “How We Come to Own Ourselves.” September 7; http://www.mises.org/story/2291https://mises.org/library/how-we-come-own-ourselves

MacIntosh, Duncan. 2007. “Who Owns Me: Me or My Mother? How to Escape Okin’s Problem for Nozick’s and Narveson’s Theory of Entitlement.” In Liberty, Games and Contracts: Narveson and the Defence of Libertarianism, edited by Malcolm Murray, 157–172, Chap. 11. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing.

Steiner, Hillel. 1994A. An Essay on Rights. Oxford: Blackwell. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2mi4-xFgT7NNWhEQWNhbXB6enc/view

Steiner, Hillel. 1994B. “The Fruits of Body-Builders’ Labour.” In Ethics and Biotechnology, edited by AnthonyDyson and JohnHarris, pp. 64–78. London: Routledge.

Steiner, Hillel. 2002. “Self-Ownership, Begetting, and Germ-Line Information.” In A Companion to Genethics, edited by JustineBurley and JohnHarris, pp. 317–324. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Steiner, Hillel. 2008. “Debate: Universal Self-ownership and the Fruits of One’s Labour: A Reply to Curchin.” Journal of Political Philosophy. Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 350–355. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00318.x.

Vallentyne, Peter. 2000. “Introduction: Left-Libertarianism – A Primer.” In Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate, edited by Peter Vallentyne and Hillel Steiner, 1–20. Hampshire, UK and New York, NY: Palgrave.

Vallentyne, Peter. 2002. “Equality and the Duties of Procreators.” In The Moral and Political Status of Children, edited by David Archard and Colin Macleod, 195–211, Chap. 11. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vallentyne, Peter. 2012. “Libertarianism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition). Accessed July 23. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/libertarianism/.

Vallentyne, Peter, Hillel Steiner, and Michael Otsuka. 2005. “Why Left-Libertarianism Is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried.” Philosophy and Public Affairs. Vol. 33, Spring, pp. 201–215.

Young, Andrew T. 2015. “Argumentation Ethics and the Question of Self Ownership.” Journal of Private Enterprise 30(3), pp. 79–88; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/6I1PKZ08/Argumentation%20Ethics%20and%20the%20Question%20of%20Self-Ownership.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:43 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

I thought you conceded that libertarianism is wrong in a small number of scenarios?

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 9:43 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

I think that libertarianism is 100% correct, and that the state is 100% evil.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:41 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Novel Solution

Dear Walter,

Say we are 95% sure that libertarianism is correct, or that libertarianism is correct in 95% of scenarios.

My compromise is to allow government but to require a 95% vote to pass any law. What do you think of this idea?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Letter 4

Dear Nathan:

It’s a violation of the NAP to steal. You should be punished for it. You’re still a hero, though. I don’t see the difficulty for libertarianism in handling this one.

I’ve written about this here:

Block, Walter E. 2009. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2009/lp-1-17.pdfhttp://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/#comments (Concentration camp guard)

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 6:23 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

What about if I must steal $1 from you to save the world? Surely it’s not wrong for me to steal it.

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Dec 30, 2020, at 5:51 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

Not wrong. Just that there are unanswered questions. Why do we own ourselves, for example. I’m not sure. But I don’t think any other philosophy has any answer to this either. Ditto for the continuum challenge.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:43 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

I thought you conceded that libertarianism is wrong in a small number of scenarios?

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 9:43 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

I think that libertarianism is 100% correct, and that the state is 100% evil.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:41 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Novel Solution

Dear Walter,

Say we are 95% sure that libertarianism is correct, or that libertarianism is correct in 95% of scenarios.

My compromise is to allow government but to require a 95% vote to pass any law. What do you think of this idea?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Letter 5

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Friday, January 01, 2021 10:08 PM

To: ‘Nathan Fryzek’ <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Subject: RE: Novel Solution

Dear Nathan:

It is always ethical to follow libertarian law, the non aggression principle. The NAP proscribes murder, rape, theft, all immoral acts.

Stipulate that taking heroin is immoral. Libertarian doesn’t urge anyone to indulge in this drug. It only maintains that if you do so, you should not be punished, since you didn’t engage in an NAP violation.

You’re not an autodidact! You were my student!!!

Gauging progress, status is tough. It is easy in chess, track and swimming races, football, basketball, baseball. There are winners and losers. One way is the Nobel Prize. But Obama got the peace prize for doing nothing much, and Trump didn’t, even though he made peace in the Middle East. So that is no longer a good criterion of success.

when a man has no ends left he has a desire to pursue, he is no longer a man, he is dead.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 01, 2021 9:56 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

It’s not always ethical to follow libertarian law, so why should we stick to it 100% of the time?

If we allow a 95% vote to override libertarian law then we will be able to get out of these fringe scenarios.

On a more practical side, how do you think an autodidact can gauge their progress? I think before you mentioned number of articles, but I don’t write many. I was thinking number of books, but I tend to learn most through online lectures. How can I objectively measure my progress in a field?

When it comes to praxeology, what happens to man when he has no ends left he has a desire to pursue? https://youtu.be/5m7X-1V9nOs

The best analogy is calories: many people have too few, but rich people like us often have too many. What happens when we are so productive we have nothing left to do, will we self destruct like the mouse society in the video?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Dec 30, 2020, at 7:12 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

It’s a violation of the NAP to steal. You should be punished for it. You’re still a hero, though. I don’t see the difficulty for libertarianism in handling this one.

I’ve written about this here:

Block, Walter E. 2009. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2009/lp-1-17.pdfhttp://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/#comments (Concentration camp guard)

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 6:23 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

What about if I must steal $1 from you to save the world? Surely it’s not wrong for me to steal it.

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Dec 30, 2020, at 5:51 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

Not wrong. Just that there are unanswered questions. Why do we own ourselves, for example. I’m not sure. But I don’t think any other philosophy has any answer to this either. Ditto for the continuum challenge.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:43 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

I thought you conceded that libertarianism is wrong in a small number of scenarios?

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 9:43 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

I think that libertarianism is 100% correct, and that the state is 100% evil.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:41 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Novel Solution

Dear Walter,

Say we are 95% sure that libertarianism is correct, or that libertarianism is correct in 95% of scenarios.

My compromise is to allow government but to require a 95% vote to pass any law. What do you think of this idea?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Letter 6

Dear Nathan:

Actually, I’ve been interested in 3: Austrian econ, libertarianism and sociobiology.

Here’s one of my contributions to the latter:

Levendis, John, Walter E. Block and Robert B. Eckhardt.  2019. “Evolutionary psychology, economic freedom, trade and benevolence.” Review of Economic Perspectives – Národohospodářský obzor; Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 73-92; https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/revecp/19/2/article-p73.xml; 10.2478/revecp-2019-0005; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2019-0005https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/here-is-one-of-my-best-scholarly-papers-ever/https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/evolutionary-psychology-economic-freedom-trade-and-benevolencehttps://www.growkudos.com/publications/10.2478%252Frevecp-2019-0005/reade

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Saturday, January 02, 2021 1:19 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

I was your student for economics, but I haven’t had a mentor for biology, physics, etc.

How have you been able to be content with a single subject?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Jan 1, 2021, at 10:07 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

It is always ethical to follow libertarian law, the non aggression principle. The NAP proscribes murder, rape, theft, all immoral acts.

Stipulate that taking heroin is immoral. Libertarian doesn’t urge anyone to indulge in this drug. It only maintains that if you do so, you should not be punished, since you didn’t engage in an NAP violation.

You’re not an autodidact! You were my student!!!

Gauging progress, status is tough. It is easy in chess, track and swimming races, football, basketball, baseball. There are winners and losers. One way is the Nobel Prize. But Obama got the peace prize for doing nothing much, and Trump didn’t, even though he made peace in the Middle East. So that is no longer a good criterion of success.

when a man has no ends left he has a desire to pursue, he is no longer a man, he is dead.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 01, 2021 9:56 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

It’s not always ethical to follow libertarian law, so why should we stick to it 100% of the time?

If we allow a 95% vote to override libertarian law then we will be able to get out of these fringe scenarios.

On a more practical side, how do you think an autodidact can gauge their progress? I think before you mentioned number of articles, but I don’t write many. I was thinking number of books, but I tend to learn most through online lectures. How can I objectively measure my progress in a field?

When it comes to praxeology, what happens to man when he has no ends left he has a desire to pursue? https://youtu.be/5m7X-1V9nOs

The best analogy is calories: many people have too few, but rich people like us often have too many. What happens when we are so productive we have nothing left to do, will we self destruct like the mouse society in the video?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Dec 30, 2020, at 7:12 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

It’s a violation of the NAP to steal. You should be punished for it. You’re still a hero, though. I don’t see the difficulty for libertarianism in handling this one.

I’ve written about this here:

Block, Walter E. 2009. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2009/lp-1-17.pdfhttp://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/#comments (Concentration camp guard)

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 6:23 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

What about if I must steal $1 from you to save the world? Surely it’s not wrong for me to steal it.

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

On Dec 30, 2020, at 5:51 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

Not wrong. Just that there are unanswered questions. Why do we own ourselves, for example. I’m not sure. But I don’t think any other philosophy has any answer to this either. Ditto for the continuum challenge.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 5:43 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Novel Solution

I thought you conceded that libertarianism is wrong in a small number of scenarios?

On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 9:43 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Nathan:

I think that libertarianism is 100% correct, and that the state is 100% evil.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 9:41 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Novel Solution

Dear Walter,

Say we are 95% sure that libertarianism is correct, or that libertarianism is correct in 95% of scenarios.

My compromise is to allow government but to require a 95% vote to pass any law. What do you think of this idea?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Letter 7

Dear Nathan:

Yes, extrapolate from the freest economies today

Best regards,

Walter

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Sunday, January 03, 2021 7:13 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Pester

Dear Walter,

I know I have asked you this before, but I’ve decided to pick up the search…

Since the industrial revolution real per capita income has grown at about 2.00% per annum in most civilized countries (Japan, US, UK, etc.)

Do you of a way to estimate how fast our economy would grow if government were eliminated? I know this is guesswork to some degree, but couldn’t we just extrapolate from the freest economies today?

______________________________

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

“There is some fiction in your truth, and some truth in your fiction.”

Letter 8

Dear Nathan:

Yes, several. Which on is on widespread fraud?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/author-walter-block

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Trump Will Win When Justice Is Done!” December 15; https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-will-win-when-justice-is-done_3617017.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Privatize PBS and NPR.” June 10; https://www.theepochtimes.com/privatize-pbs-and-npr_3383626.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Free Enterprise Is the Best Way to Help the Black Community.” May 19; https://www.theepochtimes.com/free-enterprise-is-the-best-way-to-help-the-black-community_3353978.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Tariffs and National Security.” April 20; https://www.theepochtimes.com/tariffs-and-national-security_3318897.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Rent Control and Limiting Tenant Security Deposits: Still a Bad Idea.” April 20; https://www.theepochtimes.com/rent-control-and-small-tenant-security-deposits-still-a-bad-idea_3318893.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Is There a Right to Health Care?” March 27; https://www.theepochtimes.com/is-there-a-right-to-health-care_3286993.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Return of Stolen Property: A Libertarian Case for Reparations.” December 18; https://www.theepochtimes.com/return-of-stolen-property-a-libertarian-case-for-reparations_3177301.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Recession or Not?” November 7; https://www.theepochtimes.com/recession-or-not_3139691.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “What to Do About Water Bottles; Everybody agrees there is too much plastic but regulation is the disease and not the cure.” October 26; https://www.theepochtimes.com/what-to-do-about-water-bottles_3128362.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Congestion Pricing, the Only Cure for Traffic Congestion Even if the city fixes it, any price is better than zero.” May 20; https://www.theepochtimes.com/congestion-pricing-the-only-cure-for-traffic-congestion_2930302.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Private Property: The Solution to Many Problems Privately organized preferences would spawn diversity, reduce conflict.” March 31; https://www.theepochtimes.com/private-property-the-solution-to-many-problems_2860068.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Bernie Sanders’ Free Stuff Isn’t Free.” February 7; https://www.theepochtimes.com/bernie-sanders-free-stuff-isnt-free_2794293.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “How Socialist Are the Scandinavian Countries?” February 7; https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-socialist-are-the-scandinavian-countries_2794294.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Bernie Sanders and the $15 Minimum Wage Delusion Forcing people to pay more for labor is counterproductive.” January 7; https://www.theepochtimes.com/bernie-sanders-and-the-15-minimum-wage-delusion_2756091.html

Block, Walter E. 2018. “Campus Tribunals Fall Short on Evidentiary Standards; University president misses mark on internal university sexual harassment, rape charge proceedings.” December 4; https://www.theepochtimes.com/campus-tribunals-fall-short-on-evidentiary-standards_2719291.html

Block, Walter E. 2018. “How to Raise Wages for the Poor; No, just boosting the minimum wage won’t do it.” November 6; https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-to-raise-wages-for-the-poor_2709184.html

Block, Walter E. 2018. “The Road to Free Trade; Every trade, before it takes place and without exception, benefits both sides.” October 28; https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-road-to-free-trade_2701883.html

Best regards,

Walter

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2021 1:08 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Evidence (2020)

Didn’t you write an article in the Epoch Times?

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

> On Jan 11, 2021, at 9:07 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

> Sorry, I dunno

> Dear :

> Best regards,

> Walter

> —–Original Message—–

> From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

> Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 8:38 PM

> To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

> Subject: Evidence (2020)

>

> Dear Walter,

>

> What is the best evidence of widespread fraud you have come across?

>

> Nathan Fryzek

> Senior: Behavioral Economics

> Metropolitan State University

Letter 9

Dear Nathan:

I don’t know why he chose that title. It seems more than ok to me.

Best regards,

Walter

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2021 6:21 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: The Ethics of Liberty

Dear Walter,

The Ethics of Liberty is my favorite book on natural law but I believe the title confuses many students, who come to conflate natural law with ethics. Do you know why Rothbard chose this title? Do you agree that the title is problematic?

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

Letter 10

Dear Nathan:

In my view, the Mises Institute stands head and shoulders above all the others.

Best regards,

Walter

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 8:10 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Watching the Watchmen

Dear Walter,

What would you say are the top 5 austro-libertarian organizations, and how would you rank them 1-5?

Mises Institute

Foundation for Economic Education

Fraser Institute

CATO

etc.

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

Letter 11

Dear Nathan:

Easy, if you’re a pinko. Difficult, if you’re an Austro libertarian, unless you stay in the closet, and publish only on issues where there’s an overlap between Austro libertarians in lefties. For example, legalizing drugs, prostitution. Even free trade might be ok. Or, do technical work, say, on the indifference curve or empirical works, for example on the elasticity of something or other.

I hope and trust you don’t mind that I copy on this several of my present students.

If I were your age, knowing what I know now, I’d still enter academia, but keep my big mouth shut until I got tenure.

I know nothing about tenure in community colleges. If you find out about this, please tell me.

Best regards,

Walter

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2021 11:34 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Tenure

Dear Walter,

How hard is it to find a tenure track job as a professor?

Also, do community colleges have tenure track positions?

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

Letter 12

Publications in prestigious journals

Raising money from government or prestigious foundations Citations to your publications Tenure Promotion to full professor Endowed chair

Dear :

Best regards,

Walter

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 10:52 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: “Success”

Dear Walter,

How is success generally defined in academia?

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

Letter 13

Dear Nathan:

Go search on the mises web.

Best regards,

Walter

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

wblock@loyno.edu

tel: (504) 864-7934

—–Original Message—–

From: Nathan Fryzek <nwfryzek@gmail.com>

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2021 8:53 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Rothbard’s CV

Dear Walter,

Do you know where I could find a complete and authoritative CV for Rothbard?

Nathan Fryzek

Senior: Behavioral Economics

Metropolitan State University

Share

2:29 am on February 22, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Conversations with Ryan Graham Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia, About Austro-libertarianism and Much More

Dear Ryan:

We three probably agree on 99% of libertarian theory.

Strategy and tactics are a very different thing. We all have the same goals, we diverge virtually only on means.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 3:01 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: shane@shanehazel.com

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

Dear Walter,

I listened to the show today and appreciate the tone of the conversation very much. It was a good conversation between two people who disagree(and not really on much).

Thanks for all you do.

As a side note, I often refer to your evictionism theory regarding abortion as, probably, my stance. And really appreciate the more nuanced discussion it generally elicits on the subject.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-11 10:48, Walter Block wrote:

Dear Ryan:

Shane helped put us on the map. All libertarians should be grateful to him.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:53 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: shane@shanehazel.com

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

Therein lies the kicker. Shane Hazel was running for Senate in Georgia and I saw no support. I’d love to be wrong on that so please feel free to correct me if I missed something.

When it came time to approve funding for all the existing socialist/communist policies on the books, Perdue and Loeffler happily votes Yes. Perdue even so far as defending his Yes vote by saying something along the lines of we have to spend now so we don’t spend later(we both know that’s not at all how it works). He says nice things about not expanding the size and scope of government, but absolutely does not legislate that way.

I’m making time for other candidates at this point. I look forward to seeing your support of libertarian candidates in the future.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-10 11:44, Walter Block wrote:

Dear Ryan:

You make excellent points. But, where I depart from you is that the senate is now in play, and if the Republians win at least one seat, they can slow down the move toward communism.

If Barr, Johnson or Weld were running for senate from Georgia, I’d happily support them vis a vis those commies the democrats are running.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2020 10:15 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: shane@shanehazel.com

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

Our support for some “libertarian” leaders is often looked back upon as a mistake. Bob Barr being a big one. Bill Weld being another obvious one. Almost all libertarians I talk to these days agree it wasn’t worth their time to support political hacks that move things in the wrong direction. That’s exactly what supporting Senators Perdue and Loeffler would be, supporting candidates who are moving us in the absolute wrong direction.

I’ve supported the Paul’s. I supported Amash before he switched(and after). I support Thomas Massie. Those aren’t the Republicans running in Georgia. There is a distinction to be made between libertarian Republicans and big state cronies like Perdue and Loeffler.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-08 23:36, Walter Block wrote:

Dear Ryan:

Ron Paul was a Republican Congressman for many years. Ditto Rand Paul and the Senate. They are more libertarian than Bob Barr, Gary Johnson and several other “Libertarian” leaders.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2020 10:17 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: shane@shanehazel.com

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

I believe the quote is, “Conservatism is just Progressivism going the speed limit.”

These are not the Republicans you’re looking for. They’re not all the same. These guys are bad news.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-08 20:18, Walter Block wrote:

Dear Ryan:

I certainly agree with this last statement of yours: “We need more supporters for liberty.”

You and I are only struggling over means, not ends.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2020 4:18 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: shane@shanehazel.com

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

Dear Walter,

I’m glad to hear you’ll be on Shane’s show! If it was likely Perdue would have won the General, then GOTV votes for Republicans should be enough to get him over the finish line. Libertarians do not need to signal their support for these abysmal candidates even if their opponents are worse by using what is general their loudest voice to signal that support, their vote. Georgia’s runoff system is actually pretty good like that functionally operating like a long, drawn out, expensive ranked choice voting system.

Democrats have had the White House, the House, and the Senate before. We got the ACA out of it, which really sucks, but when Republicans had the White House, the Senate, and the House subsequently they did nothing to change that, spending kept rising, wars kept raging, taxes continued to rise, and gun control continued to get more restrictive. I’m just done with these people, and I’m done giving them credit for being marginally “better” than the absolute worst group of policy makers America has to offer.

I’m only vaguely familiar with those efforts in that you’ve talked about it on shows like Tom Woods. It just doesn’t get me up in the morning. Trump has enough supporters. He doesn’t need my help. We need more supporters for liberty.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-08 17:02, Walter Block wrote:

Dear Ryan:

Please call me Walter. Shane Hazel has invited me to be on his podcast show and I’ve agreed to do so. We’ll certainly discuss the issues you raise. I’d be happy to discuss these issues on any other such venue.

Yes, as you say without Shane in the race, “That does leave on the table that Perdue likely would have won.” I don’t think merely “likely.” I think done deal.

How can I not agree with you that David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler are awful. But compared to what? To the two commie Democrats? Do you really want the Democrats to have the white house, the house and the senate too?

Are you familiar with my Libertarians for Trump efforts?

Epstein, Jim. 2016. “Should Libertarians Vote For Trump? Nick Gillespie vs. Walter Block.” November 2; http://freedombunker.com/2016/11/02/should-libertarians-vote-for-trump-nick-gillespie-vs-walter-block/https://reason.com/blog/2016/11/02/walter-block-nick-gillespie-debate

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ryan Graham <ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com>

Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2020 2:09 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

Dear Doctor Block,

I took off the others, but I did want to reach out to let you know your open letter caused some frustration within the ranks of Georgia Libertarians. The assumption that, “the overwhelming majority of his votes would have gone to the Republican candidate,” is false. Most of his voters would have stayed home. That does leave on the table that Perdue likely would have won, but it would also mean a significant portion of the electorate would have been disenfranchised by not having a candidate on the ballot.

I do have to ask if you’ve looked into the records of David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. If you had, I’m not so sure you’d say they more closely align with libertarian thinking. They are terrible on nearly every issue libertarians care about, wars, taxes, spending, privacy, criminal justice reform…. the list goes on. We have talked to Republican leadership in Georgia and let them know that we will not be endorsing their candidates, but would be happy to endorse policies. The ask is simple. Get on the record supporting libertarian ideas and we will promote that message. So far we’ve heard crickets. These Republicans have no desire to talk about policy because they are abysmal at it, even by Republican standards.

Finally, it’s frustrating for Georgia Libertarians to see you speak up about our race AFTER our candidate is gone instead of helping out when we had a candidate. If I’m wrong, please correct me, but this is the first time I’ve heard you talk about Shane Hazel or any of our Libertarian candidates here in GA. That didn’t come off well even in circles that typically support a lot of your message.

In Liberty,

Ryan Graham

Chair, Libertarian Party of Georgia

On 2020-12-07 20:28, Walter Block wrote:

Dear JG:

Thanks. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

Best regards,

Walter

From: jg moebus <vaw.sitka@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, December 07, 2020 8:02 AM

To: ryan.graham@lpgeorgia.com

Cc: laura.williams@lpgeorgia.comshane@shanehazel.comcommunications@alaskalp.orginfo@lp.org

Subject: An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians [with cc: to All those Trumpatistas calling for a boycott of the Runoff] [attchd as Word doc]

Dear Mr Graham, Chairman of the Georgia Libertarian Party:

This is a reaction and response to Walter Block’s “Open Letter” to Y’All regarding what You should do on January 5.  [https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/walter-e-block/open-letter-to-libertarians-in-georgia/.]

It is part of a longer piece ~ An Open Letter to Walter Block re: Your “Open Letter to Libertarians in Georgia” [and an Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians of my own] ~ which follows below, and is attached as a Word document.

Let me know if this makes any sense to You folks; and if it does, what i can do to help make it happen. Thank You, Good Luck, and Stay Safe.

/s/  jeff

Jeffrey G Moebus                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Master Sergeant, US Army [Retired]                                                                                                                                                                                               Veterans Against War [Sitka Platoon]                                                                                                                                                                                                  Sitka, Alaska

ps: i have many fond memories of Georgia from my times at Fort Benning: Jump School back in the 60s, Senior NCO Infantry School in the 80s, and protesting the School of the Americas in the Spring of 2001.

###

An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

[with cc:  to All those Trumpatistas calling for a boycott of the Runoff]

On January 5, 2021, You will have four choices:

1.  You can vote for two Republicans.

2.  You can vote for two Democrats.

3.  You can vote for one of each.

4.  You can not vote.

This offers a fifth choice.

At this moment ~ if Your Libertarianism that guides Your judgment on political candidates, their platforms, and their promises is real ~ there is nobody in this election that, as a Libertarian, You can honestly and sincerely vote For.  All there is are four candidates that You would, if You could, vote Against.

At this moment, the closest thing You can do to voting Against any and all of the candidates is to simply not vote, which tells nobody anything and accomplishes absolutely nothing.

The alternative to this is to vote, and to Write-In “None Of These Candidates.”  That way, You make perfectly and explicitly clear to Georgia’s and America’s Political Class and its Media just exactly what You think about the choices that You have been given in this election; and that None of them meet Your criteria for earning and meriting Your vote.

No doubt, there will be no place or space to write-in anybody on the voting machine ballots on January 5, let alone “None Of These Candidates.”  So, when You go to vote, take along a signed and witnessed legal document declaring that You wish to officially and legally declare that Your choices for the next United States Senators from the Great State of Georgia are “None Of These Candidates.”  The same thing could also be done on Mail-In ballots.

It is very likely that such documents presented in person on election day, or that Mail-In ballots similarly altered, will not be accepted as legal and legitimate votes.  Which is not a problem because that is not the point of the whole exercise.  The point is that there is nobody who has earned and is qualified to get Your vote, and that You want to do something about it to make sure that they and the people running their productions know that without any doubt.

There is time enough between now and January 5 to make Georgia election officials and the media, and thus Georgia, and thus the entire Nation, aware of, call it, say, “#NOTC-GA21.”

One can only wonder how Election2020 would have turned out if “None Of These Candidates” was an official option on every ballot in every State in every Presidential, Senate, and House election.  If #NOTC-USA20 had been an option, i guarantee You that more than just a few of those 33% of registered voters who didn’t vote because they had nobody to vote For, would have voted because they had somebody they could legally and legitimately vote Against:  ie, Every candidate on the ballot.  That’s what “None Of These Candidates” makes possible.

The people of Nevada have had the “None Of These Candidates” option on all ballots for all federal, state, and local elections since the early 70s. In 2016, #NOTC-NV16 took 28,863 votes.  Clinton beat Trump in Nevada by 27,202 votes. while  Libertarian  Gary Johnson pulled in 37,384.

So who cost Trump Nevada in 2016, Johnson or NOTC?  Well, obviously there is no way to really know that, but at least Nevadans had [and have] a clear and present Choice on election day besides and beyond what the Ruling Elite’s Political Class  has deigned to give them.  Instead of simply boycotting the election and manifesting their dissatisfaction with the whole circus that is American politics by being invisible and thus ignored, they had [and have] the option of telling all the candidates, their parties, and their owners and operators, the media, and anybody else who was paying attention: “Stick it in Your ear.”  [Note: In 2020, NOTC-NV20 received 14,079 votes to Libertarian Jo Jorgeson’s 14,783; and Biden beat Trump by 33,596.]

Along with a Constitutional Amendment mandating a balanced annual Federal Budget, another one establishing Age and Term limits for All federal Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch officials, and a third one very clearly specifying what Presidents can and cannot do without a formal Congressional Declaration of War [in other words, no more AUMFs], there also needs to be an Amendment that requires that “None Of These Candidates” be a choice like any other candidate on every ballot in every Federal Presidential, Senate, and House election.

If nothing else, the Libertarians of Georgia could serve as the vanguard, and the Empire State of the South could serve as the launch pad for a national initiative to get “None Of These Candidates” on the ballot of every State with 2022 Mid-Term Senate and House elections, and then every State for 2024’s elections for President and Congress.  Even without a Constitutional Amendment.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if, in an election, “None Of These Candidates” actually got more votes than any other candidate?

###

An Open Letter to Walter Block re:

Your “Open Letter to Libertarians in Georgia”

[and an Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians of my own]

Dear Professor Block:

This is a reaction and response to Your “Open Letter to Libertarians in Georgia,” posted to LewRockwell.com on December 5.  i apologize in advance for the length of this, but Your Letter triggered some thoughts and feelings that have been brewing for quite some time, and i am finally able to begin to capture them in words.  That’s why i have broken it down into relatively bite-size chunks.

So, first of all, this is a hearty and sincere Thank You for providing that certain something that has helped me pull a number of different strands together and express what i have come to believe, think, think i know, know i know and actually understand, and what i have yet to learn and understand about all this.

Thus, in a very real sense, You have served as a Teacher for me thru this.  Perhaps You can regard it as a term paper from a distant learning student.  Whether You can or You can’t, Thank You again.

Once i finish this rant, i look forward to reading Your “A Libertarian Analysis of the Covid Pandemic” in the new issue of The Journal of Libertarian Studies.  i’ve been looking for one of those for a long time now.

Jeffrey G Moebus

Master Sergeant, US Army [Retired]

Veterans Against War [Sitka Platoon]

Sitka, Alaska

###

0.  In order that You know exactly where i am coming from on all this, let me preface it with my Letter to the Editors published on December 2 in the local newspaper, the Daily Sitka Sentinel:

While community Elder Statesman Spike Arnold’s admonition that “Individual rights are a great thing to have when they don’t Trump other individuals’ rights” sounds good, it’s not completely accurate [LTE, Nov 30].

The exercise of one person’s actual, real, individual Human Rights does not ~ because it cannot ~ trump [or even “Trump”] another person’s real, actual individual Human Rights.

And that’s because to “trump” another’s Rights is to violate their Rights; and NoBody ~ no individual, group, organization, or institution ~ has the Right to violate the Rights of another Human Being without due process under a Rule of Law.

Human Rights do not ~ because they cannot ~ conflict.  Nobody’s Right to Life gives them the right to physically harm or take the life, or the liberty, property, or privacy of another human being, except in self-defense.

Nobody’s Right to Liberty gives them the right to violate the liberty or the rights to life, property, privacy, or the pursuit of happiness of another human being, except to prevent or to punish the violation of the rights of other human beings.

Nobody’s Right to Property gives them the right to commit theft, fraud, extortion, embezzlement, or any other form or threat of violence against the property of ~ or contracts with ~ anybody else.  Or anybody else’s life, liberty, privacy, or pursuit of happiness.

Nobody’s Right to Privacy empowers them to violate the privacy, or any other right of any other human being.

And Everybody’s Right to the Pursuit of Happiness gives them the Right to do everything and anything that they want to do, as long as it violates nobody else’s Rights.

So, Mr Arnold’s declaration is faulty:  Nobody’s “individual rights” can morally, ethically, or legally take precedence over and privilege above ~ or “Trump” ~ Anybody else’s, except via the processes and procedures of that Rule of Law.

The problems begin when the concept of Human Rights is extended and expanded beyond Life, Liberty, etc, to include the meeting of Human Needs and the satisfaction of Human Wants: nutrition, sanitation, health care, housing, education, financial, communications, transportation, and energy infrastructures, economic well-being and stability, physical security of person and property, and leisure.

The problems begin when the Right to the Pursuit of Happiness is taken to mean the Right to Happiness itself; and that the proper function of government is to guarantee that Happiness, at least for some folks.  Even if that violates the actual Rights of others.  That’s how Trumping occurs.

As regards Your Open Letter…

1.  You wrote:

From a libertarian point of view, it is imperative that the Republicans hold the senate.

From this Libertarian’s point of view ~ and more importantly, as a student of the history of the last 20 years and of the 20 years between the end of World War I and the beginning of World War II ~ it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever which party controls the Senate. Any more than it will make [or has made] any difference which party controls the House or who sits in the Oval Office.

It certainly hasn’t made much difference since 9/11 and “The Forever War” and the Surveillance/Secrecy/Security/Safety State that it spawned, has it?  Or the 2008 financial “¢risi$” and The Great Recession it launched, clearing the road to our current $27.4 trillion national, sovereign Debt.  Or The COVID-19 Event, The Greater Recession, and the Medical Police State that it has birthed.  You continued:

If Donald remains president for four more years, he can appoint even more judges and justices who take our Constitution seriously (Stephen Breyer is now 82 years old).

How is that any different from the “packing” that You assure us the Democrats will pull off if They control the Senate?  Packing is Packing, isn’t it?  Your objections seem not to be with packing, as such; rather, it’s with who gets to do the packing and who they get to put into the pack.

That reminds me of the 2016 election and all those people who wanted to abolish the Electoral College until asked if they would still want to do that if the results of the election had been exactly reversed: if Trump had won the popular vote, and Clinton the Electoral vote.  Or the refusal of Republicans in 2016 to allow a lame-Duck Senate to confirm a lame-Duck President’s SCOTUS nominee, but their insistence on doing exactly that in 2020, and getting away with it.

2.  You concluded Your laundry list of what Democrat control of the Senate would bring with:

The Venezuelans are coming here to escape that sort of thing; we certainly don’t want our country to follow that path.

Less Venezuelans are coming here to escape “that sort of thing” than Central Americans who are attempting to escape the  carnage, chaos, and collapse left over from the more than a century of American imperialist intervention, pillage, and plunder in that area, starting with Smedley Butler who, as he put it:

…helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler]

And if it started with Butler, it continued unabated thru the 50s, 60s, and 70s starting with the coup in Guatemala [one year after the coup in Iran], on into the 80s with Ollie North’s Holy Crusade on behalf of Bozo [Iran-Contra, and all that; remember?], and up into the present as that area attempts to deal with, among other things,  America’s insatiable demand for drugs flowing north thru it.  And probably more Venezuelans would be less inclined to leave their homeland if the United States was not inflicting crippling economic sanctions on it.  Just like we are on Iran and did on Iraq for three months shy of 13 years before we “liberated” it from Saddam and all his WMDs.  [Funny how Iran keeps popping up in these matters, isn’t it?]

3.  You then asked,  “What does all this have to do with libertarians, pray tell?” And answered with “Simply this”:

David Perdue [R]    49.7%   2,456,709

Jon Ossoff      [D]    47.9%   2,366,847

Shane Hazel   [L]       2.3%      114,625

Pointing out that “Mr. Hazel, a fine fellow I am sure…bagged more votes than the difference between the two major candidates,” You then asserted that “had he not entered the race the very strong presumption is that the overwhelming majority of his votes would have gone to the Republican candidate.”

On what possible historical, empirical, or any other kind of evidence do You base that assertion and make that “very strong presumption”?  Are there any actual instances that You can cite that show that ~ when registered Libertarians don’t have a Libertarian choice on a ballot ~ that they will even generally cast their vote for a Republican?

And they’ll do that because, well, because Republicans have, in general, or at least sort of generally, they have more sympathetic-to- and resonant-with “libertarian” values, principles, goals, and standards than Democrats?  If there is any evidence to that effect, i would LOVE to see it.

For starters: If a Libertarian wasn’t on the ballot, how many of those people would not have voted at all, let alone for anybody at all?  Roughly one-third of America’s registered voters did not vote for President in 2020 [or in 2016].  People don’t vote for lots of reasons:

There are those who share Emma Goldman’s sentiment that “If voting could actually, really change anything, it would be illegal.”  Or they remember Papa Joe Stalin’s admonition that “It’s not who votes that counts; it’s who counts the votes.” [Particularly appropriate this year, eh?]  Or, they can only concur 100% with George Carlin’s “Don’t vote.  It only encourages the mother-fuckers.”

One other reason that at least some folks don’t vote is simply because they have nobody that they can actually, honestly, and sincerely vote For, as opposed to merely using that vote “For” one candidate as a way to vote Against another candidate.

In 2016, how many people voted for Trump not because they actually, really wanted him to be President, but because they did not want Clinton in the Oval Office?  That may go a long way toward explaining all those “Swing States” that were Clinton’s for the taking that ended up not.

And the same question can be legitimately asked about 2020:  How many people voted for Biden because they are tired of Trump, Trumpatismo, the Trumpatistas, and the whole alternative fact, post-truth, fake news reality-tv show that America has become during the reign of POTUS Maxximmuss XLV?  And perhaps explain why Trump lost those same Swing States this time, as well.  Of course there are all those ballots smuggled in by North Korea.  Or was it Hugo Chavez?  Or George Soros?

My “Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians” at the ps: below offers a very suitable alternative for those folks in Georgia who want neither the Republicans Perdue and Loeffler, nor the Democrats Ossoff and Warnock, nor any combination of the four, to be representing them in the US Senate, but who still want to be heard on election day.  You continued:

If so [ie, if all those nasty Libertarians had not voted their conscience but had lined up with Team Trump/Perdue in the first place], there would not now be any need at all for a runoff, since Mr. Perdue would have been elected with more than fifty percent of the vote.

Well, maybe if more people in Georgia thought that the job that Senator Perdue was doing in Washington ~ on behalf of the people of Georgia, as opposed to on behalf of his owners and operators, handlers and script writers ~ if more registered voters in Georgia felt that way, then maybe there also would not have been any need for a runoff either, eh?

i am reminded of how the Democrats claimed back in 2000 that people who voted for Nader had cost Gore the election in Florida, thus giving the White House to Bush.  What they conveniently forgot is that if Gore had won either his home state of Tennessee, or his party’s sitting President’s home state of Arkansas, he would have won the election, regardless of how the SCOTUS ruled on Florida.  In fact, the whole goatrope would have never gotten to SCOTUS in the first place.  Gore is the only candidate who ever lost both his own home state and that of his boss’s, who also happened to be the President. But to this day, Democrats blame Nader for what

“woulda, coulda, shoulda, ” [as Jim Mora once put it] been but wasn’t.  Just think; 9/11 might have happened with Gore in command instead of Cheney.

4.  You continued:

I take it that there is no question that the Republican philosophy (the cynic in me says, “to the extent it exists at all”) is now far more compatible with that of the Libertarian Party than is that of the Democrats.

There is a very fine line between a cynic and a realist; particularly in 21st century America, Year IV of The Age of Trump.

We libertarians agree with the party of the elephant far more than that of the donkey on lower taxes, less regulation, not strangling the traditional energy industry, worrying about the ever-increasing deficit, gun rights, free speech, opposition to the cancel culture, to “peaceful” riots, to Marxism, to the Green New Deal, to socialized medicine and on and on.  [Emphases added.]

“Worrying about the ever-increasing deficit,” are those Republicans?  Which deficit is that?

The one that will be built into the FY2021 Federal Budget, when those folks finally get around to actually having a Budget for FY2021?  How about the deficit that was built into the FY2020 Budget; just like the deficits of FY2019, 2018, and so forth all the way back to FY2001, the LAST time this government had more Receipts than Expenditures, and an actual Surplus instead of again, yet, and still another Deficit?  And None of these Deficits could have happened without the able and willing aiding and abetting of Republicans?

And that was all the doing of the Democrats, eh?  And Republicans did, have done, and are doing Everything that they could, can, and will do to show just how “worried” they are about it, eh?  Great.  So when are they actually going to stop worrying about it, and begin to actually DO something about it?  Wasn’t that one of Trump’s signature campaign promises?  Along with Mexico paying for his Wall, as i recall.  And his record-breaking deficits started well before The COVID-19 Event.  Or is that all the Democrats’ fault, as well?

“Worrying about the ever-increasing deficit,” are they?  And exactly When did that start?

Given the fact that twenty years ago, the national, sovereign Debt [the way all those Deficits keep piling up and not going away] of this Nation stood at just under $5 trillion; and Given the further fact that sometime this weekend, it will pass the $27.4 trillion mark, and counting….; Given all that, i guess We, the American People, must have somehow missed all that Republican worrying about deficits in the News.

So, again, exactly Who among Republicans have been [or actually are today [December 5, 2020] worried enough about those Deficits and that Debt to actually DO something, anything about it?  And when did they do that?  Does settling for a just-under $1 trillion COVID Relief, Subsidy, Loan, Grant, and Bailout package that will be totally Deficit Spending as a compromise to a proposed $2 trillion deal qualify?  Especially after helping craft and agreeing to the earlier $3.2 trillion injection by The Fed and Treasury of credit and greenbacks?  Is THAT what You’re talking about?

In any event, Republican [and Libertarian] “opposition to Marxism, etc” is discussed below at Item 7.

5.  You wrote:

Yes, it cannot be denied, we are with the Democrats vis a vis the Republicans on legalizing all drugs, as in Oregon, and also prostitution, as in most of Nevada. As for abortion and immigration, libertarians are strongly divided on these issues, so they cannot enter into our deliberations.

Let’s talk for a minute about all the things that virtually all Republicans and Democrats [at least those among the Clintonista/Obamanoid/Bidenite wing of corporatist, crony capitalist, neoliberal/neoconservative post-modern “liberals”] are in total agreement on, shall we?

a.  Pretending that that $27.4 trillion national, sovereign Debt [which does not include State and Local government Debt] is nothing to be concerned about.  At least not now.  This is Now, and that will be Whenever; hopefully after I leave office, and better yet, after I’m dead.

b.  Pretending that the looming bankruptcies of the nation’s federal, state, and local “Entitlement” programs [Social Security, Medicare, Retirement Pensions and Plans, etc] are also nothing to be concerned about.  Again, at least not now.  See a.

c.  Pretending that “The Forever War” needs to go on, well, forever.  Or at least until Russia sufficiently recovers from the collapse of the USSR and China from the madness of Mao to become actual, real, no-shit Threats to America’s post-Cold War I uni-polar global hegemony, thereby giving us, and the Rulers of Russia and China, and the People, Lands, and Nations of the entire Planet Cold War-II.  Got to keep that Military-Industrial Complex in full fiddle, Ya know.  So we got to have that “Threat,” Don’tcha know?  Otherwise, what would we need a $1+ trillion M-IC annual budget for?  What could we spend all that newly created money and credit on?

d.  Pretending that America’s burgeoning Surveillance/Secrecy/Security/Safety State panopticon, with its intimate ties to our Techno-Infotainment matrix, the militarization of Law Enforcement, and the emergence of a Prison-Industrial complex is actually making Americans “safer and securer” from terrorists and other malcontents, foreign and domestic.

e.  Pretending to believe that the American People honestly, sincerely believe and think that SwampLand politicians ~ be they Republocrat or Demican ~ their bureaucrats, expert consultants, and the “Special Interests” who own and operate them actually, really care about them, their Children, and their Children’s Children.

Given that that’s just a quick overview of the most important things that Democrats and Republicans have in common [there are many more, as demonstrated by history and the present], which Republicans are more appropriate for Libertarians to vote for than for which Democrats?

You conclude:

The Republicans, with all their flaws and there are many, are significantly more oriented in our direction than are the Democrats.

With all due respect, Professor: BULLSHIT.  i use that term as Professor Harry G. Frankfurt used it in his book, and i mean that as respectfully, but also as forcefully sincerely as i possibly can.  Republicans may be into, as You put it:

lower taxes, less regulation, not strangling the tradition[al] energy industry, worrying about the ever-increasing deficit [Not; see above.], gun rights, free speech, opposition to the cancel culture, to “peaceful” riots, to Marxism, to the Green New Deal, to socialized medicine and on and on”

but they agree and stand tall and together with Democrats on the far, far more Critical, if not Existential Threats to America noted in items a thru e above.

6.  i’m glad You noted that Mr Hazel is [of course] not “obligated to recommend to all those who voted for him that they now support David Perdue.”  That’s actually quite “White” of You, as they say in the parlance.

But i’m puzzled by Your claim that “Hazel and all the Georgia libertarians who voted for him blatantly violated this [vintage 2016 Libertarians For Trump] precept” about how to vote in Red vs Purple states.  Did Hazel and all those Georgia Libertarians sign a pledge to honor that “precept” back in 2016?  Or sign it new or renew it for Election2020?  Have they even heard of it?

Apparently not, given that You acknowledge, as You put it, that “They owe us all not a legal debt… .”  But then You qualify that with “but [they owe us all] a moral one, to support David Perdue.” [Emphasis added.]

First of all, exactly who is this “us all” that they “owe” any kind of “debt” to, legal, moral, or otherwise?  Those who want to see the Republicans maintain control of the Senate, and can’t do it without their help?  And on what possible, conceivable basis is this a “moral” debt?  What have Republicans ever done for Georgian Libertarians?  And whose system of ethics is that “moral” debt to be drawn against?  But most of all, since when has “morality” had anything to do with America’s $ 1 = 1 Vote system of electoral politics, government, and governance?

So the guidance and direction from Libertarians For Trump in 2016, “the pragmatic libertarian recommendation[,] was to throw our weight in the direction of the Donald.”  i’m curious:  Did Y’All have a 2020 version?

Libertarians For Trump… .  i would love to hear Ludwig von Mises’, FA Hayek’s, Henry Hazlitt’s, Leonard Read’s, John T Flynn’s, Albert J Nock’s, and Murray Rothbard’s takes on that whole idea.  Ron Paul’s, Jacob Hornberger’s, Lew Rockwell’s, Jeffrey Tucker’s, Richard Ebeling’s, Robert Murphy’s, Ryan McMaken’s, Tom Wood’s, John Whitehead’s, and Jon Miltimore’s views on it would be equally interesting, as well.  And that’s just for starters.

Sorry, Professor, but that generates almost as much cognitive dissonance for me as Atheists For Jesus, Fundamentalists For Satan, Jews For Muhammad, and Proud Boys For BLM and/or LGBT.

7.  re: Republican [and Libertarian] “opposition to Marxism, to the Green New Deal, to socialized medicine and on and on.”

It is my deepest-seated conviction, Professor, that Republicans [and Libertarians] would be much more relevant to the future of the United States if they were more concerned about and opposed to Fascism than they are about and to Marxism and its various manifestations in 21st century America; whether as “progressivism,” “democratic socialism,” “socialistic democraticism,” or whatever the Sandersistas, The Squad, and that crowd are calling themselves these days.

In fact, the best thing Libertarians [and Republicans, and anybody else who is concerned about the future of this Nation] could do would be to completely forget about the so-called “threat” of Marxism and its progeny altogether, and focus on the very real, present, and growing existence of Fascism in the United States.

Marxism, communism, and socialism have never been serious threats to America in the sense of Marxists, communists, or socialists seizing total control of the government and the economy, and establishing some sort of “dictatorship of the proletariat.”   Even back in the good old days at the peak of “The Red Scare” or of Cold War I, the actual, real even likelihood of a real threat of a Leftist insurrection and overthrow of the government was nil.  And the possibility an invasion and occupation by the USSR was even niller.

Today, America’s Left is totally bereft of any significance, relevance, or capability to accomplish anything in the real world [the World’s Left is in even worse shape.]   It is rather evident from Biden’s Cabinet and Staff appointments that the “Marxist” wing of the Democratic Party ~ with their schemes and dreams for a Green New Deal, socialized medicine, guaranteed annual  income, student loan Jubilee, free college, child care, and etc for all, and so “on and on” ~ those folks have been rendered essentially insignificant, existentially irrelevant, and effectively inert in SwampLand.

It is also evident ~ by those same appointments ~  that the reign of the corporatist, crony capitalist, neoliberal/ neoconservative, post-modern “liberalism” of Obama is back in full force after the 4-year stint of the corporatist, crony capitalist, neoconservative/neoliberal post-modern “conservatism” of Trump. [Altho he does get credit, at least, for not starting any new wars.  But, it’s still 44 days to January 20, and a lot can happen between then and now.]

The point of all this is that today, in the final days of Phase One of The Age of Trump, America is getting much closer to the ultimate destination of The Road Hayek talked about; that variant of  Collectivism termed “Socialism,” and specifically, that version of Socialism identified as “National Socialism,” or “Fascism.”  And America has been on that Road to Fascism for a long, long time.

While the Trump Presidency has only brought us further along the way. the Biden Presidency just might be the one to complete the work fully launched by “FDR and his New Deal…[and] Wilson with his Federal Reserve, Income Tax, and his ‘War to end all War and make the world safe for Democracy,’ to say nothing of Wall Street and the nascent American proto-Empire fresh from its conquests in Hawai’i, China, the Philippines, and throughout Latin America.”

That quote is from “Why a Vote for Either Trump or Biden Was a Vote for Fascism,” which argues:

That America now has an advanced proto-Fascist system of government and governance; that it has had that system for quite some time now; and that ~ given the current state of America as regards The COVID-19 Event, the Greater Recession, domestic Race, Ethnic, Class, Generational, Gender, and Sectarian relations; the national, sovereign Debt and looming “entitlements” programs bankruptcies; its economic, political, and military interactions with international allies and adversaries [real and imagined, as in            “The Forever War”]; and the general public’s overall general dissatisfaction with and disapproval of how things are going in this country ~  that nobody going to Washington in January is going to change that.  Any of it.

It was my attempt to explain to a friend the day after the election exactly what Fascism is [as opposed to Socialism or Communism], How and Why America is a proto-Fascist State, and Why and How regime change in SwampLand in January [regardless of who ends up on top] will accomplish nothing but to no doubt inevitably make things worse.  And now, of course, there is all the added turmoil of the Presidential election and the brouhaha down in Georgia to make it all that more interesting. “Why a Vote for Either” is below at the pss:.         .

8.  All of which brings us back to Item 1 above: To Your declaration that “From a libertarian point of view, it is imperative that the Republicans hold the senate,” and my counter-assertion that “it will make absolutely no difference whatsoever which party controls the Senate. Any more than it will make [or has made] any difference which party controls the House or who sits in the Oval Office.”

But first, we have to get thru the next scheduled Episodes of this reality-tv extravaganza [barring some landmark Court decisions or something akin to a second 9/11 along the way]:  December 14 and the Electoral College vote; January 6 and the Counting of those Votes and the Joint Declaration of Congress as to the next President and Vice President; and January 20, their Inauguration.

Going to be an interesting 45 days, eh?  Especially when the MAGA Marchers, Stop The Stealers, and their cohorts, colleagues, and compeers take to the streets again.

And then we’ll see what happens.

On my 72d birthday in July of 2018, i decided and determined to live long enough to see if, first, there would be an election on November 3, 2020; and that, if there was, second, to stick around to see if an inauguration happens on January 20, 2021, regardless of who “won” and who “lost” in November.  Whether that Regime Change actually occurs or not, i have pretty much resigned myself to the fact that ~ barring a Revolution ~ i won’t have to live another six years to see whether or not America survives to celebrate its 250th birthday on July 4, 2026.

Another way of asking “Will America survive to July 4, 2026?” is:  “Should America ~ as it is today ~ survive?  And then, even if it should, Can it?”

Those who would dismiss these questions as either irreverent, irrelevant, absurd, conspiratorial, and/or unpatriotic, if not down right treasonous, are invited to confront the simple, obvious [albeit painful] reality that the United States of America is today, has been for a long time, and shows no indication of stopping being:

1.  a Debtor State;

2.  a Bankrupt State;

3.  a Warfare State;

4.  a Welfare State;

5,  a Secrecy/Surveillance/Security/proto-Police State;

6,  an Oligarchic/Plutocratic Deep State;

7.  an Overshoot State;

And, perhaps most importantly,

8,  a People and Nation no longer merely “divided,” but fractured ~ even to the point of disintegration ~ in ways not seen in more than 160 years, since the eve of the First American Civil War.

With each day as this whole goat rope unfolds further, i understand deeper, clearer, and better just exactly what Jefferson was talking about when he said “If there is a Just God, I tremble for the future of my Country.”

Thank You again, Professor Block, for Your “Open Letter to Libertarians in Georgia.”  Like i said at the outset; it has helped me pull a whole bunch of strands together.  i look forward to start weaving them into some meaningfully useful patters.  Have a great day, stay Safe, and say hi to New Orleans for me.

[My wife and i lived on a sailboat over in Slidell for seventeen years before we got wiped out by Katrina and headed west to San Francisco, and ultimately, up here to Alaska.  So i am very familiar with the very lovely Loyola Campus; i used to spend some time over there carousing with Bill Quigley, of the Law School, and exploring the mysteries and wonders of a Law library.]

/s/ ~ jeff

###

ps:

An Open Letter to Georgian Libertarians

[with cc:  to All those Trumpatistas calling for a boycott of the Runoff]

On January 5, 2021, You will have four choices:

1.  You can vote for two Republicans.

2.  You can vote for two Democrats.

3.  You can vote for one of each.

4.  You can not vote.

This offers a fifth choice.

At this moment ~ if Your Libertarianism that guides Your judgment on political candidates, their platforms, and their promises is real ~ there is nobody in this election that, as a Libertarian, You can honestly and sincerely vote For.  All there is are four candidates that You would, if You could, vote Against.

At this moment, the closest thing You can do to voting Against any and all of the candidates is to simply not vote, which tells nobody anything and accomplishes absolutely nothing.

The alternative to this is to vote, and to Write-In “None Of These Candidates.”  That way, You make perfectly and explicitly clear to Georgia’s and America’s Political Class and its Media just exactly what You think about the choices that You have been given in this election; and that None of them meet Your criteria for earning and meriting Your vote.

No doubt, there will be no place or space to write-in anybody on the voting machine ballots on January 5, let alone “None Of These Candidates.”  So, when You go to vote, take along a signed and witnessed legal document declaring that You wish to officially and legally declare that Your choices for the next United States Senators from the Great State of Georgia are “None Of These Candidates.”  The same thing could also be done on Mail-In ballots.

It is very likely that such documents presented in person on election day, or that Mail-In ballots similarly altered, will not be accepted as legal and legitimate votes.  Which is not a problem because that is not the point of the whole exercise.  The point is that there is nobody who has earned and is qualified to get Your vote, and that You want to do something about it to make sure that they and the people running their productions know that without any doubt.

There is time enough between now and January 5 to make Georgia election officials and the media, and thus Georgia, and thus the entire Nation, aware of, call it, say, “#NOTC-GA21.”

One can only wonder how Election2020 would have turned out if “None Of These Candidates” was an official option on every ballot in every State in every Presidential, Senate, and House election.  If #NOTC-USA20 had been an option, i guarantee You that more than just a few of those 33% of registered voters who didn’t vote because they had nobody to vote For, would have voted because they had somebody they could legally and legitimately vote Against:  ie, Every candidate on the ballot.  That’s what “None Of These Candidates” makes possible.

The people of Nevada have had the “None Of These Candidates” option on all ballots for all federal, state, and local elections since the early 70s. In 2016, #NOTC-NV16 took 28,863 votes.  Clinton beat Trump in Nevada by 27,202 votes. while  Libertarian  Gary Johnson pulled in 37,384.

So who cost Trump Nevada in 2016, Johnson or NOTC?  Well, obviously there is no way to really know that, but at least Nevadans had [and have] a clear and present Choice on election day besides and beyond what the Ruling Elite’s Political Class  has deigned to give them.  Instead of simply boycotting the election and manifesting their dissatisfaction with the whole circus that is American politics by being invisible and thus ignored, they had [and have] the option of telling all the candidates, their parties, and their owners and operators, the media, and anybody else who was paying attention: “Stick it in Your ear.”  [Note: In 2020, NOTC-NV20 received 14,079 votes to Libertarian Jo Jorgeson’s 14,783; and Biden beat Trump by 33,596.]

Along with a Constitutional Amendment mandating a balanced annual Federal Budget, another one establishing Age and Term limits for All federal Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branch officials, and a third one very clearly specifying what Presidents can and cannot do without a formal Congressional Declaration of War [in other words, no more AUMFs], there also needs to be an Amendment that requires that “None Of These Candidates” be a choice like any other candidate on every ballot in every Federal Presidential, Senate, and House election.

If nothing else, the Libertarians of Georgia could serve as the vanguard, and the Empire State of the South could serve as the launch pad for a national initiative to get “None Of These Candidates” on the ballot of every State with 2022 Mid-Term Senate and House elections, and then every State for 2024’s elections for President and Congress.  Even without a Constitutional Amendment.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if, in an election, “None Of These Candidates” actually got more votes than any other candidate?

###

pss:

Why a Vote for Either Trump or Biden Was a Vote for Fascism

0.  The Argument, stated briefly:

That America now has an advanced proto-Fascist system of government and governance; that it has had that system for quite some time now; and that ~ given the current state of America as regards The COVID-19 Event, the Greater Recession, domestic Race, Ethnic, Class, Generational, Gender, and Sectarian relations; the national, sovereign Debt and looming “entitlements” programs bankruptcies; its economic, political, and military interactions with international allies and adversaries [real and imagined, as in            “The Forever War”]; and the general public’s overall general dissatisfaction with and disapproval of how things are going in this country ~  that nobody going to Washington in January is going to change that.  Any of it.

1.  First of all, then:  Has America had and does it now have an “advanced proto-Fascist system of government and governance”?

Consider first the following list of fourteen common features of Fascism exhibited by Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, Tojo’s Japan, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. And then ask Yourself whether or not the ruling elite of the United States and its government with their wholly-owned and -operated politicians and bureaucrats [and media] exhibit any of the same characteristics:

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.

3. Identification of enemies/scape-goats as a unifying cause.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.

5. Rampant sexism.

6. A controlled mass media.

7. Obsession with national security.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.

9. Power of corporations protected.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.

14. Fraudulent elections.

And i would add

15.  Dependency on budget deficits, borrowing, and governmental debt [linked to #s 2, 4, 7, 9, and 13].

16.  Political, economic, and military imperialism [linked to #s 1-4, 6-9, and 13].

17.  Corruption and militarization of law and regulatory enforcement [linked to #s 2, 9, 10, 12, and 13].

18.  Racism, ethnicism, xenophobism, sectarianism, ageism, and classism [linked to #s 1-3, 7, 8, 10, and 11].

19.  Restrictions on or violations of freedoms of conscience, speech, press, assembly, and association [linked to #s 2, 3, 6,

           and 9-11].

20.  Violations of freedom From [as opposed to merely Of] religion [linked to #s 2, 5, and 8].

[Note:  The full list of Numbers 1-14 with explanations is at the original article, “Fascism Anyone ???”  by Laurence Brittby at https://secularhumanism.org/2003/03/f ascism-anyone/.  Numbers 15-20 will be developed in a future rant.]

Given those 20 characteristics of classical, traditional, post-World War I-, World War II-, and Cold War I-epoch Fascism, it is easy to characterize The Age of Trump as “fascist.”  But which of those characteristics were and are equally applicable as accurate descriptions of the Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower, and Truman regimes?  An easier question to answer would be which of those listed properties and attributes of Fascism were and are Not characteristic of those earlier administrations?

In fact, one can go all the way back to FDR and his New Deal to see Fascism in significant bloom in America, if not all the way back to Wilson, his Federal Reserve, Income Tax, and his “War to end all War and make the world safe for Democracy,” to say nothing of Wall Street and the nascent American proto-Empire fresh from its conquests in Hawai’i, China, the Philippines, and throughout Latin America.

In a word:  None of this shit started with Trump.

All he is doing is picking up from where Obama left off and had prepared for him; which is what Obama did with and from Bush, and Bush from Clinton, and so forth back to the beginning. And Trump [and all his  predecessors] could not have done any of all this without the willing and able abetting and assisting of and from those folks at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, the Congress of the United States, who have abdicated almost total power and authority to the White House in critical, core areas of Constitutional responsibility.  Again, for quite some time now.

And THAT is why i maintain that a vote for either Trump or Biden was a vote for Fascism.  It wasn’t a vote for 20th century Fascism [ala Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, etc], but for what various scholars have termed “Fascism with 21st century American characteristics,” “Fascism with an American Face,” “Participatory Fascism,” “Democratic Fascism,” “Friendly Fascism,” and, ultimately, just plain old “Good Fascism.”  It was a vote for this brand of Fascism, as carried out and brought to maturity over the course of the last century by America’s politicians and bureaucrats and their owners and operators.

And there is nothing about a Biden Presidency and what he claims he would do if elected that will change any of that.  Which of the 20 points listed above were absent from the Obama, Clinton, or Carter administrations, of which Biden was always an active player and participant, from Senator to Vice President?  Which of the 20 points were absent during the Bush II, Bush I, Reagan, Ford, and second Nixon administrations, when he went from Junior to Senior Senator?

The only reason Biden is still in DC is because he apparently gets done what the people who own and operate him wanted and want done; just like anybody who survives more than one term of office there does and must do.  So Joe Biden is one of the Ultimate. Perpetual SwampLanders [he and Alaska’s sole U.S. Representative Don Young were Freshmen together in 1973].

If he ends up being sent to the Oval Office, it is highly unlikely that he has been sent there to change anything that will re-direct the agenda or hamper the work of those he has worked for for almost 50 years.

2.  AND ANOTHER THING… .  That argument is based on how i am using the term “Fascism,” just as Your statement that “All I can think…so many voted for Fascism” is based on how You are using it.

Nowadays, when most folks [at least on the Left] use that term [or “fascist”], they are usually referring blanketly to somebody/anybody/ anything who disagrees with what they believe in, stand for, and are trying to accomplish, culturally, socially, economically, and especially politically.  It’s the Left’s doppelganger for “socialism/socialist” [or “communism/communist”] that those on the Right use to describe those on the Left [and sometimes even in the Muddled Middle] who disagree with Them about what they’re up to.  Used that way, “socialism/socialist,” “communism/communist,” and “fascism/fascist” are relatively useless terms.

But a little bit of what the ancient Confucians called “rectification” ~ the clarification of the meaning of words so that they best describe reality ~ shows that “socialism” and “fascism” are but two very similar systems for the centralization and concentration, the maintainment and sustainment, the perpetration, expansion, consolidation, and perpetuation of Power by one distinctively minority group of Humans over the masses of Others thru the machinations and manipulations of The State, and its executive, legislative, judicial, regulatory, and above all,  its police functions and authorities.  Specifically:

There is little difference in Principle between Socialism and Fascism; only in the specifics of organizational structures and operational systems, and their designated enemies.

In Socialism [and Communism], the government [more specifically, the “Party,” on behalf of “The People”] owns everything ~ all the public and private facilities, factors, and forces of production, distribution, and consumption ~ and has total control over all economic policy, procedures, and execution, from the national to the regional to the local economic activity level, and even to the individual level.  The government is both prime producer and determiner of distribution and consumption.  Its enemies are capitalists, corporatists, fascists, conservatives, neoconservatives and neoliberals, and anybody who disagrees with them; especially classical liberals, anarchists, and libertarians.

In Fascism, there is private [mostly corporate] ownership of business; and that is the only significant difference.  The facilities, factors, and forces of production, distribution, and consumption are indeed under private, corporate ownership and day-to-day managerial control.  However, it is still the government that dictates policy, procedure, and execution at all levels.  And it is the government that is a ~ if not the ~ prime and primary customer.  Fascism’s enemies are socialists, communists, syndicalists and unionists, liberals, proto- and neo-progressives, and anybody who disagrees with them; also especially classical liberals, anarchists, and libertarians.

The main difference between Socialism and Fascism is that in Fascism, the concepts of private ownership and, particularly, profit have not been abandoned, as in Socialism.

The similarities between the two are as follows:

a.  Both systems place government in the business of meeting Human Needs and satisfying Human Wants, at the inevitable cost of violating Human Rights.

b.  Both systems make extended use of state-of-the-art manipulation of the Needs and Wants of those they like to call “The People,”, and the obfuscation, suppression, and obliteration of those same folks’ Rights.

c.  Both systems survive and thrive best in the presence of an “Other”:  a real Enemy, or at least a credible Threat of one.  And if they don’t have one, they are both very skilled at creating one.

d.  Both systems are created, maintained, and sustained for the express purpose of giving Ruling Elites ~ real and/or woulda, coulda, shoulda been wannabes ~ ready access to Power [the ability to force another Human Being to do something, whether they want to or not], and Wealth [the ability to buy and sell Power at a profit].

So “Thar Ye Be,” as they put it in the Old Country.  My primary sources for all this are as follows:

As We Go Marching, John T Flynn; Doubleday, 1944

FRIENDLY FASCISM: The New Face of Power in America, Bertram Gross; Black Rose Books, 1980

Right-Wing Collectivism: The Other Threat to Liberty, Jeffrey Tucker; Foundation for Economic Education, 2017

Fascism Old and New: American Politics at the Crossroads, Carl Boggs; Routledge, 2018

Did that answer Your question?

Share

2:23 am on February 22, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Conversations with Zane Mooneyhan About Austro-libertarianism and Much More

Letter 1

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 3:08 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: A second Question

One more thing, sorry I bring all my questions to you, you always answer fastest and with the most sources haha. So I was thinking about federally enclosed land and whatnot, and how there is millions of square miles of “federally owned” land, or otherwise controlled by the US govt, where they are preventing people from going in and homesteading their own land. Is there a case to be made that the govt control of this land is significantly inflating land/property prices? And if so would you say the libertarian solution would be to 1. Sell off the land or 2. “free up” the land, allowing people to go in and homestead the property. The second option seems like the correct libertarian solution to me, and I think this whole thing gets overlooked when talking about poverty and capital accumulation under capitalism. I don’t see why there is so much free land, that has not been homesteaded, but merely “captured” and has been taken control of. In this vein I wanted to talk about your principle of ownership being “9/10ths of the law”. If you remember I asked you the question “what if we know someone’s claim to property is illegitimate, but we don’t know who the specific legitimate claim belongs to” and your answer was roughly that ownership being 9/10ths of the law, unless we knew who rightfully owned the land that the current owner is “legitimate”. I had a question regarding this line of reasoning, and applying it to the “state”. It would seem that arguments against the legitimacy of the state become more difficult assuming this line of reason to be true. As one could say the state “possesses” the land we operate on now, and therefore can legitimately set the rules. Now, even if we know the state accumulated this land, and its possession illegitimately, namely through conquest, but we don’t necessarily know who the “legitimate” owners are. So it would seem like the state is operating as a quasi legitimate entity given this line of reason. I would love to hear your thoughts. As always

Best Regards,

Zane Mooneyhan

Dear Zane:

I don’t know about “significantly.” That’s an empirical claim, for which you’d need some econometric analysis. But, yes, govt ownership of land shifts its supply curve to the left, thus raising land prices.

The libt solution would NOT be to sell off this govt land, since the govt would then get the money, and it already has too much money at its disposal. The second solution, as you say, is correct.

I appreciate your evil vicious () attempt to undermine my claim that possession is .9 of the law. But I don’t think this criticism succeeds, since the counter claimer against the govt has an easy case: the govt get’s all its money thru coercion. The libt solution would be to privatize all govt property.

Here are some readings on this:

Anderson and Hill, 1996; Block, 2002, 2009, 2015; Butler, 1988; Carnis, 2003; Ebeling, 2013; Hanke, 1987A, 1987B; Hannesson, 2004, 2006; Hoppe, 2011; Karpoff, 2001; Megginson, 2001; Moore, 1987; Moore and Butler, 1987; Motichek, Block and Johnson, 2008; Nelson and Block, 2018; Ohashi, 1980; Ohashi, Roth, Spindler, McMillan and Norrie, 1980; Pirie, 1986; Savas, 1987; Walker, 1988; White, 1978

Anderson, Terry L. and Peter J. Hill, editors. 1996. The privatization process: a worldwide perspective, Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Block, Walter E. 2002. “Radical Privatization and other Libertarian Conundrums,” The International Journal of Politics and Ethics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 165-175; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/radical_privatization.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2009. The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors; Auburn, AL: The Mises Institute; http://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Roads-And-Highways-Factors/dp/1279887303/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336605800&sr=1-1http://mises.org/books/roads_web.pdfhttp://mises.org/daily/3416

Block, Walter E. and Peter Lothian Nelson. 2015. Water Capitalism: The Case for Privatizing Oceans, Rivers, Lakes, and Aquifers. New York City, N.Y.: Lexington Books; Rowman and Littlefield; https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781498518802/Water-Capitalism-The-Case-for-Privatizing-Oceans-Rivers-Lakes-and-Aquifershttps://mises.org/library/case-privatizing-oceans-and-rivers

Butler, Eamonn, ed., 1988, The Mechanics of Privatization, London: Adam Smith Institute

Carnis, Laurent. 2003. “The Case for Road Privatization: A Defense by Restitution.” Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines. Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 95-116

Ebeling, Richard. 2013. “Why Not Privatize Foreign Policy?” http://epictimes.com/article/127064/why-not-privatize-foreign-policy

Hanke, Steve H., ed., 1987A. Privatization and Development, San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies

Hanke, Steve H. 1987B. “Privatization.” In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate and P. Newman, eds., The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, v. 3. London: The Macmillan Press, Ltd.: 976-77.

Hannesson, Rögnvaldur. 2004. The Privatization of the Oceans, in D.R. Leal (Ed.): Evolving Property Rights in Marine Fisheries, Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield, pp. 25-48.

Hannesson, Rögnvaldur. 2006. The Privatization of the Oceans. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 2011. “Of Private, Common, and Public Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization,” Libertarian Papers 3, 1. http://libertarianpapers.org/2011/1-hoppe-private-common-and-public-property/

Karpoff, Jonathan M. 2001. “Public versus Private Initiative in Arctic Exploration: The Effects of Incentives and Organizational Structure,” The Journal of Political Economy, 109 (1): 38-78.

Megginson, W. Netter, J. 2001. “From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization.” Journal of Economic Literature, 39(2): 321-89.

Moore, Stephen. 1987. “Privatizing the U.S. Postal Service,” in Stephen Moore and Stuart Butler, eds., Privatization, Washington: Heritage Foundation.

Moore, Stephen and Stuart Butler, eds., 1987. Privatization, Washington: Heritage Foundation.

Motichek, Amy, Walter E. Block and Jay Johnson. 2008. “Forget Ocean Front Property, We Want Ocean Real Estate!” Ethics, Place, and Environment; Vol. 11, Issue 2, June, pp. 147 – 155

Nelson, Peter Lothian and Walter E. Block. 2018. Space capitalism: the case for privatizing space travel and colonization. Palgrave Macmillan; https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-74651-7https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/3319746502/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&condition=new&qid=1531187909&sr=8-1&linkCode=sl2&tag=economicpolicyjournal-20&linkId=959e913e476f48b289a16223d557a826http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2018/07/new-walter-block-book-space-capitalism.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Ohashi, T.M. 1980. Privatization, theory and practice : distributing shares in private and public enterprise. The Fraser Institute, Vancouver, B.C.

Ohashi, T.M., T.P. Roth, Z.A. Spindler, M.L. McMillan, & K.H. Norrie. 1980. Privation Theory & Practice, The Fraser Institute, Vancouver, B.C.

Pirie, Madson, 1986, Privatization in Theory and Practice, London: Adam Smith Institute

Savas, E. S. 1987.  Privatization. Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers.

Walker, Michael A. 1988.  ed., Privatization: Tactics and Techniques, The Fraser Institute, Vancouver, B.C.,  Canada

White, Lawrence H., 1978, “Privatization of municipally-provided services,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, Summer, pp. 187-197

Margaret Thatcher:

Duxbury, Nick. 2013. “Iron Lady’s right to buy and economic policies had far-reaching impact; Social landlords reflect on Thatcher’s legacy.” April 12; http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/social-landlords-reflect-on-thatcher%E2%80%99s-legacy/6526486.article

Gamble, Andrew. 1988. “Privatization, Thatcherism, and the British State .” Journal of Law and Society     Vol. 16, No. 1, Spring, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1409974

Gamble, Andrew. 1988. “Privatization, Thatcherism, and the British State .” Journal of Law and Society     Vol. 16, No. 1, Spring, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1409974

Gulliver, Kevin. 2013. “Thatcher’s legacy: her role in today’s housing crisis; Margaret Thatcher made a huge impact on the housing sector during her time in office, and we can still feel the effects today.” The Guardian. April 17; http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2013/apr/17/margaret-thatcher-legacy-housing-crisis

Marsh, David. 1991. “Privatization under Mrs. Thatcher: a review of the literature.” Public Administration, Volume 69, Issue 4, pages 459–480, December; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00915.x/abstract

Milligan, Brian. 2013. “Right-to-buy: Margaret Thatcher’s controversial gift.” BBC News. April 10; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22077190

Wolf, Joel. 1991. “State Power and Ideology in Britain: Mrs Thatcher’s Privatization Programme.” Political Studies.Volume 39, Issue 2, pages 237–252, June;

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1991.tb01365.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false

THE PRIVATIZATION OF THE OCEANS, by Rögnvaldur Hannesson

Reviewed by Donald R. Leal (Property and Environment Research Center)

http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?issueID=48&articleID=623

RAE:  http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/pboettke/rae.html

bibliography of online articles on privatization generally, “Free-Market Alternatives to the State”:  http://www.libertariannation.org/b/BIBHOME.HTM

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 2

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 3:23 PM

To: ‘zane mooneyhan’ <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Subject: RE: Housing Guarantee

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 2:57 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Housing Guarantee

Hey Professor Block! Tis’ me again, haha. I was wondering if you have any sources on federal housing guarantees? This seems to be a bit of  another one of the proposals of those modern monetary guys. Besides just inducing business cycles by the massive credit expansion that would be necessary for this operation to occur, what are some other economic consequences of the govt literally allotting houses to all the homeless in the country. Also, if I understand correctly the ABCT focuses on the lowering of interest rates through credit expansion. So it doesn’t necessarily just focus on monetary expansion, but that done through the credit markets. And I know there is a bit of a distinction between mises and hayek here, where hayek focussed more on interest rates being set low and then having expansion at that lowered level, whereas mises, looked more at credit expansion as a whole, pushing down the interest rates lower than they would be backed by voluntary savings (which, to my understanding is why most misesians are full reservers, and many hayekians are fractional, as they don’t hold that all expansion will necessarily insight the boom). So my question is, if not the credit markets, where can new money enter into the economy?

Dear Zane:

The govt can just purchase a stock or a bond, or a car or a toothbrush for that matter, with newly created money. Of course it can do so thru the credit markets, but it need not utilize that route.

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 3

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2021 10:22 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: School

Professor Block, I want to thank you so much again for everything you’ve done, even if it’s just been two short 1 hr interviews with us it has meant the world. And you are always so apt to reply to emails and supply sources on everything. I’m going to be completely honest, I already went to college once, for mechanical engineering (I’m 21) but I dropped out, I hated it, did not enjoy it one bit. However when I discovered Economics, especially austrian econ and Philosophy, there has been a fire ignited in me for knowledge. There’s so much I want to know and learn, and while I feel like I’m always good at learning on my own, I  have hundreds of books at my disposal, blogs, lectures, etc. But part of me wants to come back to school, and really learn these things, beyond just what I do on my own. You have been such an inspiration in my journey of learning, the amount of stuff you have written is awe inspiring, and I too, want to lead the future to freedom. So that being said, I have been looking at coming to Loyola, but there’s a problem, when I did my year of college, bc I hated it so much, i rarely went to class, I never took my tests, essentially, instead of just dropping out, I failed most of my classes, so I have a low GPA now because of it. I feel like i’m stuck between a rock and a hard place and I’m not sure what to do, If I applied to Loyola I don’t think I would get in, in fact I’m not even sure how I would afford it, but that’s besides the point because I could always take out loans. So I guess my question is, what do I do? Do I keep going on at it alone, learning as much as I can, and trying to teach through my social media platform as much as possible, or do I try and get some sort of degree, even if it can’t be at loyola? As always I look forward to your response

Best Regards,

Zane Mooneyhan

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2021 3:17 PM

To: ‘zane mooneyhan’ <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Subject: RE: School

Dear Zane:

Thanks for your kind words.

It is not a matter of praxeology, it is an empirical matter as to whether or not you will be accepted by Loyola. Way to test this? Apply!

I’ve spend two hours with you an zoom. I was VERY impressed with your analyis of the economics of property rights, homesteading, precluding. I’d be delighted to write an excellent letter of recommendation.

In my first econ class I received a D. I almost failed out because instead of answering exam questions, I would subject them to criticism. You and I are on the same wavelength.

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 4

Dear Zane:

Sorry I don’t have anything exactly on that. This is not exactly on point, but close:

Council, 2019; Muhlhausen, 2017A, 2017B; Resnikoff, 2014; Weidinger, 2019.

Council of Economic Advisers. 2019. “Government Employment and Training

Programs: Assessing the Evidence on their Performance.” June;

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Government-Employment-and-Training-Programs.pdf

Muhlhausen, David. 2017B. “So far, federal job-training programs have been outright failures.” March 14; https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/323885-thus-far-federal-job-training-programs-have-been-an

Muhlhausen, David. 2017A. “Federal Job Training Fails Again.” March 10;

https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/federal-job-training-fails-again

Resnikoff, Ned. 2014. “Job training programs may be more popular than they are effective.” October 14;

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/job-training-programs-may-be-more-popular-they-are-effective

Weidinger, Matt. 2019. “CEA report finds most government training programs fall short.” June 24;

https://www.aei.org/poverty-studies/cea-report-finds-most-government-training-programs-fall-short/

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 10:35 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

yes, anything like that, or any sort of govt job program. I know there are a lot of MMT guys who recommend voluntary job programs to try and reach “full employment” and then just use fiscal policy to control inflation.

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:56 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

Like the civilian conservation corp in the 30s?

Best regards,

Walter

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

wblock@loyno.edu

Skype: Walter.Block4

tel: (504) 864-7934

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 9:37 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

Hey Professor Block! It’s Zane again, I was wondering if you had any resources on things like govt job guarantees? A lot of the keynesian guys these days are moving away from things like minimum wage in favor of job programs, while I’m aware of the many carry over impacts this would have from min wage legislation like hurting smaller businesses and the marginal producers, I was hoping you had some stuff on job programs specifically?

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 5:07 PM zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com> wrote:

Okay, thank you for understanding! We will see you then

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 4:40 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

My best wishes for your pet.

Let’s postpone this for exactly one week. I have no doubt that Aleks will do a splendid job, but I’d rather have the both of your, plus your buddies.

Best regards,

Walter

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

wblock@loyno.edu

Skype: Walter.Block4

tel: (504) 864-7934

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 3:32 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

I had a last minute emergency I’m headed to the pet hospital but Aleks will take over the interview for me

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:29 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

See you and your buddies in about 90 minutes.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 11, 2021 2:28 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

Here is the zoom link for the interview today

Aleks Popovic is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Topic: Walter Block Interview

Time: Jan 11, 2021 05:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kdqolum9Xb

On Thu, Jan 7, 2021, 10:38 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

confirmed

Walter E. Block, Ph.D.

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2021 9:03 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

That sounds great! We will see you there. Thank you again!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 9:59 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

I’m ok with 1/11/21 at 5-6 est.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 11:07 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

Thank you for the response! And I talked to the guys and it seems a lot of them will be in school at that time. We were wondering if it would be possible to do it some time in the afternoon, maybe around 5-6 EST? So about 4-5 your time. And it doesnt have to be monday, we could do any day of the week except wednesday. Also, on weekends we are free any time. Let me know what works best for you, and if you need to do it around noon, I can get a different group that wont be in school at that time.

On Tue, Jan 5, 2021, 11:15 AM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

Suppose I slip on a banaba peel on unowned territory and in my struggle to attain my balance I punch you in the nose. I’m not a criminal. I had no mens rea. It was an accident, we all agree. Do I owe you any compensation? I think I do. How much?  A reasonable amount, to be determined, hopefully, by a private court. If this occurs on some third party’s private property, then that person should determine the rules. But this occurred in your house. I don’t think you get to make a determination since you can’t be a judge in your own case. And, why are you leaving banana peels around in your house? You owe me compensation for doing that.

Whenever an interesting new problem is posed to me, I try to think of more pedestrian cases, and see if they can apply.

Here’s another case. You invite Typhoid Mary to your home. Neither of you know she is carrying this dread and contagious disease. You catch it from her. Does she owe you compensation? I don’t see why she does. I’ve written a bit about an analogous case:

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Human shields, missiles, negative homesteading and libertarianism” Ekonomia Wroclaw Economic Review. Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 9- 22; http://wuwr.pl/ekon/issue/view/515http://ekon.wuwr.pl/catalog/-38http://wuwr.pl/ekon/article/view/8520/8138

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 9:30 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

Okay, thank you! I will run this by everyone and see what works best for them, I want to make sure we have a ton of people there for you this time around. Also I had a question I was pondering on that I wanted to run by you in regards to the NAP. Say someone has coronavirus, and they arent aware of it, maybe they come over to your house, you voluntarily allowed them in, and they get you sick. And let’s just say, for the sake of the argument you could in fact prove and demonstrate that they were directly the cause of your sickness, could this be a case where you could seek reparations from them? Maybe they have to compensate for you medical bills, or your missed work, etc. So I guess my question, would this be handled like any other externality, or would this just be a case of “well we can’t really sue everyone who gets sick this seems absurd” type of deal. Looking forward to hearing your response!

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:13 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

How’s about 1/11/21? At noon, central time? If no good for you guys, give me a few alternatives.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:30 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

We are available whenever you are! This weekend on the 9th or if thats too short notice, whenever works for you. You can let us know when you’re available and we will make room!

Also, our last interview was on December 11th, we talked mostly about libertarianism and a little bit about praxeology. We went  through evictionism and talked a bit about the blockean proviso and a little bit about children under a voluntary society.

Here is the url: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJsIBr7WwKQ&t=3513s

Thank you,

Zane Mooneyhan

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 7:25 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

Sure. Delighted. When’s good for you?

Please send me the url, date, info, on our previous interviews.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:24 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Objective Law Interview

Hi professor Block! It’s Zane again, now that its the new year I was hoping that we could set up that interview on objective law and “minarchy”. I hope the holidays went well for you, me and a bunch of the guys have been reading through the list you gave us and we have come up with some critiques we thought you might like to hear. Also I just finished your book on privatizing roads, and I just started reading your critique of public choice as well as “defending the undefendable”. Anyways I hope to hear back from you soon!

Thank you,

Zane Mooneyhan

Letter 5

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 10:15 AM

To: ‘zane mooneyhan’ <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Subject: RE: Objective Law Interview

Dear Zane:

Suppose I slip on a banaba peel on unowned territory and in my struggle to attain my balance I punch you in the nose. I’m not a criminal. I had no mens rea. It was an accident, we all agree. Do I owe you any compensation? I think I do. How much?  A reasonable amount, to be determined, hopefully, by a private court. If this occurs on some third party’s private property, then that person should determine the rules. But this occurred in your house. I don’t think you get to make a determination since you can’t be a judge in your own case. And, why are you leaving banana peels around in your house? You owe me compensation for doing that.

Whenever an interesting new problem is posed to me, I try to think of more pedestrian cases, and see if they can apply.

Here’s another case. You invite Typhoid Mary to your home. Neither of you know she is carrying this dread and contagious disease. You catch it from her. Does she owe you compensation? I don’t see why she does. I’ve written a bit about an analogous case:

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Human shields, missiles, negative homesteading and libertarianism” Ekonomia Wroclaw Economic Review. Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 9- 22; http://wuwr.pl/ekon/issue/view/515http://ekon.wuwr.pl/catalog/-38http://wuwr.pl/ekon/article/view/8520/8138

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2021 9:30 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

Okay, thank you! I will run this by everyone and see what works best for them, I want to make sure we have a ton of people there for you this time around. Also I had a question I was pondering on that I wanted to run by you in regards to the NAP. Say someone has coronavirus, and they arent aware of it, maybe they come over to your house, you voluntarily allowed them in, and they get you sick. And let’s just say, for the sake of the argument you could in fact prove and demonstrate that they were directly the cause of your sickness, could this be a case where you could seek reparations from them? Maybe they have to compensate for you medical bills, or your missed work, etc. So I guess my question, would this be handled like any other externality, or would this just be a case of “well we can’t really sue everyone who gets sick this seems absurd” type of deal. Looking forward to hearing your response!

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 9:13 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

How’s about 1/11/21? At noon, central time? If no good for you guys, give me a few alternatives.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:30 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Objective Law Interview

We are available whenever you are! This weekend on the 9th or if thats too short notice, whenever works for you. You can let us know when you’re available and we will make room!

Also, our last interview was on December 11th, we talked mostly about libertarianism and a little bit about praxeology. We went  through evictionism and talked a bit about the blockean proviso and a little bit about children under a voluntary society.

Here is the url: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJsIBr7WwKQ&t=3513s

Thank you,

Zane Mooneyhan

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 7:25 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Zane:

Sure. Delighted. When’s good for you?

Please send me the url, date, info, on our previous interviews.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Monday, January 04, 2021 6:24 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Objective Law Interview

Hi professor Block! It’s Zane again, now that its the new year I was hoping that we could set up that interview on objective law and “minarchy”. I hope the holidays went well for you, me and a bunch of the guys have been reading through the list you gave us and we have come up with some critiques we thought you might like to hear. Also I just finished your book on privatizing roads, and I just started reading your critique of public choice as well as “defending the undefendable”. Anyways I hope to hear back from you soon!

Thank you,

Zane Mooneyhan

Letter 6

Dear Zane:

I’m gonna put you off with a reading list on this, since I’m now very busy. However, next year, I could do an interview with you and your buddies on this very issue if you want.

Anderson and Hill, 1979; Benson, 1989, 1990; Block, 2007, 2010, 2011; Block v. Helfeld, 2014; Caplan, Undated; Casey, 2010; Chamberlin, 2017; Childs, 1970; DiLorenzo, 2010; Durden, 2018; Gregory, 2011; Griffin 2002; Guillory & Tinsley, 2009; Hasnas, 1995; Heinrich, 2010; Higgs, 2009, 2012, 2017, 2019; Hoppe, 2008, 2011; Huebert, 2010; King, 2010; Kinsella, 2009; Long, 2004; McConkey, 2013; Molyneux, 2008, undated; Murphy, 2005; Nisbet, 1984; Nock, 1939; Oppenheimer, 1926; Paul, 2008; Rockwell, 2013, 2016; Rothbard, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1998; Smith, 2008; Spooner, 1870; Stringham, 2007, 2015; Tannehill, 1984; Tinsley, 1998-1999; Wenzel, 2013; Woods, 2014.

Anderson, Terry and Hill, P.J. 1979. “An American Experiment in Anarcho-Capitalism: The Not So Wild, Wild West,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, 3: 9-29; http://mises.org/journals/jls/3_1/3_1_2.pdf

Benson, Bruce L. 1989. Enforcement of Private Property Rights in Primitive Societies: Law Without Government,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. IX, No. 1, Winter, pp. 1-26; http://mises.org/journals/jls/9_1/9_1_1.pdf

Benson, Bruce L. 1990. “Customary Law with Private Means of Resolving Disputes and Dispensing Justice: A Description of a Modern System of Law and Order without State Coercion.” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. IX, No. 2,” pp. 25-42; http://mises.org/journals/jls/9_2/9_2_2.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2007. “Anarchism and Minarchism; No Rapprochement Possible: Reply to Tibor Machan,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 21, No. 1, Spring, pp. 91-99; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_37.pdf

https://mises.org/library/anarchism-and-minarchism-no-rapprochement-possible-reply-tibor-machan

Block, Walter E. 2011. “Governmental inevitability: reply to Holcombe.” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 22; pp. 667-688; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_34.pdf

Block, Walter E. and Michael Fleischer. 2010. “How Would An Anarchist Society Handle Child Abuse?” October 13; https://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block167.html

Casey, Doug. 2010. “Doug Casey on Anarchy.” March 31; http://www.caseyresearch.com/cwc/doug-casey-anarchy

May 11, 2014. Walter Block debates Jan Helfeld on anarchism versus minimal government; Jan Helfeld <janhelfeld@gmail.com>; Daniel Rothschild daniel.y.rothschild@gmail.comhttp://youtu.be/58-YSENYuVMhttps://archive.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/walter-block-debates-anarcho-capitalism-vs-limited-government/http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/05/walter-block-vs-jan-helfeld-on-anarchy.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hsKmqXy55E

Caplan, Bryan. Undated. “Anarchist Theory FAQ, or, Instead of a FAQ, by a Man Too Busy to Write One.” http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm

Chamberlin, Antón and Walter E. Block. 2017. “The case for the stateless society: law.” Acta Economica et Turistica. Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 103-118; https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/aet.2017.3.issue-2/aet-2017-0012/aet-2017-0012.xml?format=INT;

https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/aet.2017.3.issue-2/aet-2017-0012/aet-2017-0012.pdf

Childs, Roy. 1970. “An Open Letter to Ayn Rand’ https://www.lewrockwell.com/1970/01/roy-a-childs-jr/objectivism-and-the-state-an-open-letter-to-ayn-rand/https://archive.org/stream/ChildsOpenLetter/Childs%20Open%20Letter_djvu.txt

DiLorenzo, Thomas J. 2010. “The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality.” The Independent Review, v. 15, n. 2, Fall 2010, pp. 227–239; http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_15_02_4_dilorenzo.pdf

Durden, Tyler. 2018. “Is Anarcho-Capitalism Possible?” March 25; https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-24/anarcho-capitalism-possible

Gregory, Anthony. 2011. “Abolish the Police.” May 26; https://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory213.html

Griffin, G. Edward.  2002. The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve, American Media, Westlake Village, CA

Guillory, Gil & Patrick Tinsley. 2009. “The Role of Subscription-Based Patrol and Restitution in the Future of Liberty,” Libertarian Papers 1, 12; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/12-the-role-of-subscription-based-patrol-and-restitution-in-the-future-of-liberty/

Hasnas, John. 1995. “The myth of the rule of law.” Wisconsin Law Review 199;

http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm

Heinrich, David J. 2010. “Justice for All Without the State.” The Libertarian Standard. May 6; http://www.libertarianstandard.com/articles/david-j-heinrich/justice-for-all-without-the-state/

Higgs, Robert. 2009. “Why We Couldn’t Abolish Slavery Then and Can’t Abolish Government Now.” August 20; https://www.lewrockwell.com/higgs/higgs128.html

Higgs, Robert. 2012. “What is the point of my libertarian anarchism?” January 16; https://archive.lewrockwell.com/higgs/higgs180.html

Higgs, Robert. 2017. “Is a National Government Necessary for National Defense?” March 23; http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/03/is-national-government-necessary-for.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TargetLiberty+%28Target+Liberty%29

Higgs, Robert. 2019. “The Siren Song of the State.” July 23; https://mises.org/library/siren-song-state?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=2063d61085-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-2063d61085-227976965

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 2008. “Reflections on the Origin and the Stability of the State.” June 23; https://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe18.html

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 2011. “State or Private Law Society.” April 10;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe26.1.html

Huebert, Jacob. 2010. Libertarianism Today. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger

King, Seth. 2010. “Daily Anarchist Interviews Walter E. Block,” September 9;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block165.html

Kinsella, Stephan. 2009. “The Irrelevance of the Impossibility of Anarcho-Libertarianism.” August 20; http://www.stephankinsella.com/2009/08/20/the-irrelevance-of-the-impossibility-of-anarcho-libertarianism/

Long, Roderick. 2004. “Libertarian Anarchism: Responses to Ten Objections” https://www.lewrockwell.com/long/long11.html

McConkey, Michael. 2013. “Anarchy, Sovereignty, and the State of Exception: Schmitt’s Challenge.” The Independent Review, v. 17, n. 3, Winter, pp. 415–428. http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_17_03_05_mcconkey.pdf

Molyneux, Stefan. 2008. “The Stateless Society: An Examination of Alternatives.” http://www.mail-archive.com/libertarianenterprise@yahoogroups.com/msg02056.html

Molyneux, Stefan. Undated. “’Practical Anarchy.” http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/practicalanarchy.pdfhttp://cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/books/PA/Practical_Anarchy_by_Stefan_Molyneux.mp3.

Murphy, Robert P. 2005.  “But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over?” July 7; http://mises.org/story/1855http://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over

Nisbet, Robert. 1984. “Cloaking the State’s Dagger’ The history of political thought is a history of one euphemism after another to disguise the naked power of the state..” October; https://reason.com/1984/10/01/cloaking-the-states-dagger/

Nock, Albert Jay. 1930. “The Criminality of the State.” March, https://mises.org/library/criminality-state

Nock (1930): “”

Oppenheimer, Franz. 1926. The State. New York: Vanguard Press

Paul, Ron.  2008. “On the Inner Contradictions of Limited Government.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o4kiWpqoeg&feature=PlayList&p=9645F6A68683F679&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=4

Rokwell, Lew. 2013. “What Would We Do Without the State?” March 31;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/134782.html

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/what-would-we-do-without-the-state/

Rockwell, Lew. 2016. “The Trouble With Politics.” November 8;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/11/lew-rockwell/fatal-flaw-politics/

Rothbard, Murray N. 1973. For a New Liberty, Macmillan, New York; http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp

In the view of Rothbard (1973, emphasis added by present author): “For centuries, the State (or more strictly, individuals acting in their roles as ‘members of the government’) has cloaked its criminal activity in high-sounding rhetoric. For centuries the State has committed mass murder and called it ‘war’; then ennobled the mass slaughter that ‘war’ involves. For centuries the State has enslaved people into its armed battalions and called it ‘conscription’ in the ‘national service.’ For centuries the State has robbed people at bayonet point and called it ‘taxation.’ In fact, if you wish to know how libertarians regard the State and any of its acts, simply think of the State as a criminal band, and all of the libertarian attitudes will logically fall into place.”

Rothbard, Murray N. 1975. “Society Without a State.” The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January; https://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard133.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 1977. “Do you hate the state?” The Libertarian Forum, Vol. 10, No. 7, July; https://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard75.html

“…there is no sign that David Friedman in any sense hates the existing American State or the State per se, hates it deep in his belly as a predatory gang of robbers, enslavers, and murderers. No, there is simply the cool conviction that anarchism would be the best of all possible worlds, but that our current set-up is pretty far up with it in desirability. For there is no sense in Friedman that the State – any State – is a predatory gang of criminals.”

“The radical cannot think in such terms, because the radical regards the State as our mortal enemy, which must be hacked away at wherever and whenever we can. To the radical libertarian, we must take any and every opportunity to chop away at the State, whether it’s to reduce or abolish a tax, a budget appropriation, or a regulatory power. And the radical libertarian is insatiable in this appetite until the State has been abolished, or – for minarchists – dwindled down to a tiny, laissez-faire role.”

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 [1982]. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp

Paul, Ron. 2008. “On the Inner Contradictions of Limited Government.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o4kiWpqoeg&feature=PlayList&p=9645F6A68683F679&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=4

Shaffer, Butler.

www.mises.org/books/wizards/pdf

Smith, George Ford. 2008. The Flight of the Barbarous Relic, CreateSpace, Lawrenceville, GA

Spooner, Lysander. 1966[1870]. No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority and A Letter to Thomas F. Bayard, Larkspur, Colorado: Rampart College; http://jim.com/treason.htm

Stringham, Edward, ed. 2007. Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, Somerset, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Stringham, Edward. 2015. Private Governance: Creating Order in Economic and Social Life.  Oxford University Press

Tannehill, Morris and Linda Tannehill. [1970] 1984. The Market for Liberty, New York: Laissez Faire Books; https://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/tannehill1.html

Tinsley, Patrick. 1998-1999. “With Liberty and Justice for All: A Case for Private Police,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, Winter, pp. 95-100; http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_5.pdf

Wenzel, Robert. 2013. “Robert Ringer’s Strawman Anarchist.” February 2;

https://archive.lewrockwell.com/wenzel/wenzel211.html

Woods, Tom. 2014. “Four things the state is not.” July 29;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/07/no_author/4-things-the-state-is-not/

private police: private army:

Gregory, 2011; Guillory, & Tinsley. 2009; Hoppe, 2011; Huebert, 2010; Murphy, 2005; Rothbard, 1973, 1975, 1998 [1982];  Stringham, 2007;  Tannehills[1970] 1984; Tinsley, 1998-1999; Wiśniewski, 2014; Wollstein, 1969; Woolridge, 1970.

Gregory, Anthony. 2011. “Abolish the Police.” May 26; https://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory213.html

Guillory, Gil & Patrick Tinsley. 2009. “The Role of Subscription-Based Patrol and Restitution in the Future of Liberty,” Libertarian Papers 1, 12; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/12-the-role-of-subscription-based-patrol-and-restitution-in-the-future-of-liberty/

Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 2011. “State or Private Law Society.” April 10;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe26.1.html

Huebert, Jacob. 2010. Libertarianism Today. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger

Murphy, Robert P. 2005.  “But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over?” July 7; http://mises.org/story/1855http://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over

Rothbard, Murray N. 1973. For a New Liberty, Macmillan, New York; http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp

Rothbard, Murray N. 1975. “Society Without a State.” The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January; https://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard133.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 [1982]. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/ethics/ethics.asp

Stringham, Edward, ed. 2007. Anarchy and the Law: The Political Economy of Choice, Somerset, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Tannehill, Morris and Linda Tannehill. [1970] 1984. The Market for Liberty, New York: Laissez Faire Books; https://www.lewrockwell.com/orig11/tannehill1.html

Tinsley, Patrick. 1998-1999. “With Liberty and Justice for All: A Case for Private Police,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, Winter, pp. 95-100; http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_5.pdf

Wiśniewski, Jakub Bożydar. 2014. “Defense as a private good in a competitive order” Review of Social and Economic Issues, Vol. 1, No. 1, Summer, pp. 2-35;

http://rsei.rau.ro/images/V1N1/Jakub%20Bozydar%20Wisniewski.pdf

Wollstein, Jarret B. 1969. Society Without Coercion. In Society Without Government. New York: Arno Press

Woolridge, William C. 1970. Uncle Sam the Monopoly Man, New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2020 6:15 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Objective Law and the Market of Force

Hi Professor Block,

It’s Zane again, sorry if I’m emailing you a ton there is just so much I want to learn and I figured what’s the best source of information if not the great Walter Block himself. I had a question about some objectivist or minarchist critiques of Anarchism or Anarcho Capitalism, in that, they believe there must be a a single monopoly on force in order to ensure peaceful interactions between people. As rights are objective, there must be an objective standard upon which to juxtaposed these rights violations. Essentially the argument is that the market is summed up as peaceful voluntary interactions between people, therefore there can not be a market in force, as this would be a contradiction in terms. I was wondering if you had any material on this topic that I could refer to, or just your general thoughts on the idea of “objective law”. To me it seems like a silly concept, your law can be as “objective” as you want it to be, it’s going to be subjectively applied and interpreted by fallible human beings motived by their own wants. Not only this if their government is “voluntarily funded” this would mean the interaction between the govt and the people is “peaceful and voluntary” thus this fits the definition of “market” under their own standard, thus there is, in fact, a market for violence. The idea that a central entity must protect property rights and subdue any competing companies from arising seems antithetical,  to the very principle of property rights. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Best Regards,

Zane Mooneyha

Letter 7

Dear Zane:

See below.

Best regards,

Walter

From: zane mooneyhan <zemooneyhan@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, December 11, 2020 7:40 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Minimum Wage Resources

Hi professor Block, It’s Zane from the interview tonight. You had mentioned that you had some resources on minimum wage, rent control, and a few on charity organizations I was wondering if I could get those I would love to look through them.

Charity:

Andreoni, James. 1990. “Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving.” Economic Journal vol. 100, no. 401 (June): 464-477.

Andreoni, James, and Abigail Payne. 2003. “Do Government Grants to Private

Charities Crowd out Giving or Fund-Raising?” American Economic Review vol.

93, no. 3 (June): 792-812

Arrow, Kenneth J. 1972. “Gifts and Exchanges.” Philosophy and Public Affairs vol.1, no. 4 (Summer): 343-362.

Beaulier, Scott A., and Joshua C. Hall. 2008. “Collective Consumption Externalities and Charitable Giving” New Perspectives on Political Economy; Vol. 4, No. 1, 2008, pp. 23 – 40; http://pcpe.libinst.cz/nppe/4_1/nppe4_1_2.pdf

Beito, David. 2000. From Mutual Aid to the Welfare State. Chapel Hill, NC: University

of North Carolina Press.

Clotfelter, Charles T. 1985. Federal Tax Policy and Charitable Giving. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Gergen, Mark P. 1988. “The Case for a Charitable Contributions Deduction.” Virginia Law Review 74, no. 8 (November): 1393-14.

Glazer, Amihai, and Kai A. Konrad. 1996. “A Signaling Explanation for Charity.”

American Economic Review 86, no. 4 (September): 1019-1028.

Gruber, Jonathan, and Daniel M. Hungerman. 2005. “Faith-Based Charity and

Crowd Out During the Great Depression.” National Bureau of Economic Research

Working Paper 11332.

Hartford, Tim. 2006. “Charity is Selfish: The Economic Case Against Philanthropy.”

Slate, October 14. Online at: http://www.slate.com/id/2151244.

Hochman, Harold M., and James D. Rodgers. 1977. “The Optimal Tax Treatment

of Charitable Contributions.” National Tax Journal vol. 30, no. 1 (March): 1-18.

Hughes, Mark, “Unmasking the Two-Tier Tax-Credit Scheme,” The Philanthropist, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1989, pp. 16-31

Hughes, Mark. 1988. “Review of Walter W. Powell, ed., The Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987,” in The Philanthropist, Vol. 7, No. 4, Summer, pp. 61-65

Hughes, Mark. 1990. “Counterpoint: A Response to Bennett and DiLorenzo,” The Philanthropist, Vol. 9, No. 3, Fall, pp. 43-56.

Middle Class Windfalls and the Poverty of the Welfare State

Mark D Hughes: The Philanthropist, October 1, 1991, Pp 3 – 24

http://thephilanthropist.ca/original-pdfs/Philanthropist-10-4-82.pdf

You can find my other few articles on the subject here ( the pdfs on the right side are the best versions):   http://thephilanthropist.ca/author/mark-d-hughes/

Kingma, Bruce R. 1989. “An Accurate Measure of the Crowd-out Effect, Income

Effect, and Price Effect for Charitable Contributions.” Journal of Political Economy vol. 97, no. 5 (October): 1197-1207.

McGrnahan, Leslie M. 2000. “Charity and the Bequest Motive: Evidence from

Seventeenth-Century Wills.” Journal of Political Economy vol. 108, no. 6 (December):

1270-1291.

Reece, William S. 1979. “Charitable Contributions: New Evidence on Household

Behavior.” American Economic Review vol. 69, no. 1 (March): 142-151.

Ribar, David C., and Mark O. Wilhelm. 2002. “Altruistic and Joy-of-Giving Motivations

in Charitable Behavior.” Journal of Political Economy vol. 110, no. 2 (April):

425-457.

Rose-Ackerman, Susan. 1982. “Charitable Giving and ‘Excessive’ Fundraising.”

Quarterly Journal of Economics vol. 97, no. 2 (May): 193-212

In 1989, Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach averred: “The Americans couldn’t destroy Hanoi, but we have destroyed our city by the very low rents.” (Dhillon, 2007). According to Assar Lindbeck, 1972: “In many cases, rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city except for bombing.” In the view of Gunner Myrdal, 1965: “Rent control has in certain western countries constituted, maybe, the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision.” For further elaboration, see

Arias, Anderson and Block, 2016; Baird, 1980; Block and Olsen, 1981; Block, Horton and Shorter, 1998; Block, 2002; Bresiger, 2019; Dhillon, 2007; Friedman and Stigler, 1946; Grampp, 1950; Grant, 1989; Hayek, 1981; Johnson, 1982;  Lindbeck, 1972; Myrdal, 1965; Salins, 1980; Snarr, 2019; Thomas, 2020; Tucker, 1990

Arias, Miguel, Christine Anderson and Walter E. Block. 2016. “A Paternalist’s Mistake: Rent Control.” Journal of Economics and Political Economy. Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 627-637; http://www.kspjournals.org/index.php/JEPE/issue/view/71http://www.kspjournals.org/index.php/JEPE/article/view/1058;

http://www.kspjournals.org/index.php/JEPE/article/view/1140/1168;

http://www.kspjournals.org/index.php/JEPE/article/view/1058/1167

Baird, Charles. 1980. Rent Control: The Perennial Folly, Washington D.C.: The Cato Institute

Block, Walter E., and Edgar Olsen, eds. 1981. ”Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Vancouver, The Fraser Institute

Block, Walter E., Joseph Horton and Ethan Shorter. 1998. “Rent Control: An Economic Abomination,” International Journal of Value Based Management, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 253-263

Block, Walter E. 2002. “A critique of the legal and philosophical case for rent control,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 40, pp. 75-90; http://www.mises.org/etexts/rentcontrol.pdf

Bresiger, Gregory. 2019. “Rent Control: A History of Failure.” September 19;

https://mises.org/wire/rent-control-history-failure

Dhillon, Bob. 2007. “The perversity of rent controls,” National Post, June 28, p. FP15

Friedman, Milton and George Stigler. 1946. “Roofs or Ceilings?,” September, Irvington-on-Hudson: Foundation for Economic Education, http://www.fee.org/library/books/Roofs_or_Ceilings.asp; reprinted as Friedman, Milton, and George Stigler. 1981. “Roofs or Ceilings?” in Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Walter E. Block and Edgar Olsen, eds., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute.

Grampp, W.S. 1950. “Some Effects of Rent Control,” Southern Economic Journal, April, pp. 425-426

Grant, R.W. 1989. “Rent Control and the War Against the Poor,” Manhattan Beach, CA: Quandary House

Hayek, Friedrich A. 1981. “The Repercussions of Rent Restrictions,” Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Walter E. Block , ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute

Johnson, M. Bruce, ed. 1982. ”Resolving the Housing Crisis: Government Policy, Decontrol, and the Public Interest, San Francisco: The Pacific Institute

Lindbeck, Assar. 1972. The Political Economy of the New Left, New York: Harper and Row; cited in Rydenfelt, Sven, “The Rise, Fall and Revival of Swedish Rent Control,” in Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Walter E. Block and Edgar Olsen, eds., 1981. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1981, pp. 213, 230.

Myrdal, Gunnar. 1965. “Opening Address to the Council of International Building Research in Copenhagen”; cited in ”Dagens Nyheter (Swedish Newspaper), 25 August 1965, p. 12; cited in Rydenfelt, Sven, “The Rise, Fall and Revival of Swedish Rent Control,” in Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Walter E. Block and Edgar Olsen, eds., 1981. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, p. 224; cited in Block, Walter E. 1981. “Preface.” Rent Control: Myths and Realities, Walter E. Block and Edgar Olsen, eds., 1981. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, p. xiv.

Salins, Peter D. 1980. The Ecology of Housing Destruction:  Economic Effects of Public Intervention in the Housing Market, New York: New York University Press.

Snarr, Hal. 2019.  “How Rent Control Harms Those It Hopes to Help.” March 8; https://mises.org/wire/how-rent-control-harms-those-it-hopes-help

Thomas, Bradley. 2020. “California Heads toward Disaster with Yet Another Rent Control Ballot Measure.” March 7; https://mises.org/wire/california-heads-toward-disaster-yet-another-rent-control-ballot-measure?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=5d7d600b37-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_12_31_06_15_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-5d7d600b37-227976965

Tucker, William. 1990. The Excluded Americans: Homelessness and Housing Policies, Washington D.C.: Regnery Gateway

Tenants against rent control; http://www.wclf.org/articles/2.2.1.html

on the minimum wage, video:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/09/what-will-become-automated-now.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

https://youtu.be/XekCVIUmBiM

Pelosi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pFC3LKMIQo&t=62s

Williams, Walter E. War on Poverty. http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/09/we-were-winning-war-on-poverty.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Baum, 2015; Becker, 1995; Block, 1987, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2013, 2014,  2015; Block and Barnett, 2002; Boudreaux, 2015A, 2015B, 2015C, 2016A, 2016B, 2016C, 2016D, 2016E, 2016F, undated; Burkhauser, Couch, Wittenburg, 1996; Calton, 2017; Caplan, 2013A, 2013B, 2015; Cappelli and Block, 2012; Clemens, 2015; Cooper, 2016; Cordato, 2016; Coyne, 2018; Deere, Murphy and Welch, 1995; Dorobat, 2017; European, undated; Friedman, undated; Gallaway and Adie, 1995; Galles, 2014; Gitis, 2014; Hanke, 2014A, 2014B; Hazlitt, 1946; Howland, 2013; Hunter, 2017; Klein and Dompe, 2007; Landsburg, 2004; Lingenfelter, Dominguez, Garcia, Mayon and Block. 2017; McCaffrey, 2014; McCloskey, 2016; McCormick and Block, 2000; McMaken, 2016; Mercer, 2015; Murphy, 2014, 2015A, 2015B; Neumark, 2014, 2015; Neumark and Wascher, 1992, 1995, 2007;  Newman, 2016; North, 2014, 2016, 2017; Perry, 2016A, 2016B; Powell, 2013; Reisman, 2014, 2016; Rothbard, 1988, 2015A, 2015B; Rustici, 1985; Salerno, 2006; Salihu, 2013; Saltsman, 2015; Schiff, undated; Sohr and Block, 1997; Sowell, 1995, 2000, 2013; Tamny, 2017; Thornton, 2016; Tucker, 2915; Vedder and Gallaway. 2001; Vuk, 2006; Wanniski, 1998; Wenzel, 2013, 2015, 2016; Wiegold, 2014; Williams, 1982, 2013, 2014A, 2014B, 2014C, 2015A, 2015B, 2016, 2017, undated.

Baum, Caroline. 2015. “Caroline Baum Slams Paul Krugman (on minimum wage)” July 28;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/07/caroline-baum-slams-paul-krugman.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Becker, Gary. 1995.  “It’s simple: Hike the minimum wage, and you put people out of work.” Business Week. March 6. p. 22; http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/1995-03-05/its-simple-hike-the-minimum-wage-and-you-put-people-out-of-work

Block, Walter E. 1987. “Minimum Wage Law No Help to Unskilled,” Dateline Canada: Understanding Economics Through Press Reports, p. 37.

Block, Walter E. 2000. “Heritage Stumbles on Minimum Wage,” The Free Market, October, Volume 18, Number 10; http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.asp?control=324

Block, Walter E. 2001. “The Minimum Wage: A Reply to Card and Krueger,” Journal of The Tennessee Economics Association, Spring; http://www.mtsu.edu/~ceconed/100minwg.pdf

http://www.mtsu.edu/~ceconed/journal00.htm

Block, Walter E. 2002. “Delusions of rising wages,” New Orleans City Business, January, 28, p. 28.

Block, Walter E. 2013. “Warren’s Unwarranted Wage.” March 26;

http://mises.org/preview/6389/Warrens-Unwarranted-Wage

http://www.mises.org/daily/6389/Elizabeth-Warrens-Unwarranted-Wage

https://mises.org/library/elizabeth-warrens-unwarranted-wage

Block, Walter E. 2015. “Abolish the minimum wage law.” September 6;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/?post_type=article&p=561442&preview=truehttps://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/09/walter-e-block/abolish-the-minimum-wage/

Block, Walter and William Barnett II. 2002. “The Living Wage: What’s Wrong,” The Freeman Ideas on Liberty, December, Vol. 52, No. 12, pp. 23-24

Block, Walter E. 2014. “The Minimum Wage Law.” January 17;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/walter-e-block/want-to-stab-the-poor-and-help-labor-unions/http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/the-hardcore-austrian-school-and.htmlhttp://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2014/01/17/walter-block-versus-economists-who-want-to-raise-the-minimum-wage/http://libertycrier.com/want-to-stab-the-poor-and-help-labor-unions/?utm_source=The+Liberty+Crier&utm_campaign=2b836d4a7b-The_Liberty_Crier_Daily_News_1_17_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_600843dec4-2b836d4a7b-284768769

Boudreaux, Don. 2015A. “Dartmouth Remarks On the Minimum Wage.” November 17;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/11/dartmouth-remarks-on-minimum-wage.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2015B. “Noah Smith is no Adam Smith.” November 24;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/11/noah-smith-is-no-adam-smith.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2015C. “Data on the battle: The Minimum Wage vs Automation.”  December 18; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/12/data-on-battle-minimum-wage-vs.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2015D. “Setting the record straight: Automation Caused by Minimum Wage Laws and Otherwise.” December 19; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/12/setting-record-straight-automation.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016A. “On Further Handicapping the Least Productive.” June 3; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/06/on-further-handicapping-least-productive.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016B. “A Pro Minimum-Wage Professor Believes in Miracles.” June 14; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/06/a-pro-minimum-wage-professor-believes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016C. “What the World Looks Like to Someone Who Doesn’t Understand Economics.” June 24; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/06/what-world-looks-like-to-someone-who.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016D. “The Inconsistency of People Who Support Higher Tariffs and Who Also Support Higher Minimum Wages.” August 4; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/08/the-inconsistency-of-people-who-support.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016E. “Why the Minimum Wage is Disgraceful.” August 11; Boudreaux, Don. 2016E. http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/08/why-minimum-wage-is-

disgraceful.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. 2016F. “An Open Letter to Barry Ritholtz.” December 9; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/12/an-open-letter-to-barry-ritholtz.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Boudreaux, Don. Undated.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/06/the-truth-unseen-consequences-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Burkhauser, Richard V., Couch, Kenneth A., Wittenburg, David.  1996.  “Who Gets What From Minimum Wage Hikes: A Replication and Re-estimation of Card and Krueger.”  Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 49, no. 3, April, pp. 547-552.

Calton, Chris. 2017. “The Racist History of Minimum Wage Laws.” April 16; https://mises.org/blog/racist-history-minimum-wage-laws

Caplan, Bryan. 2013A. “Phase-In: A Demagogic Theory of the Minimum Wage.” December 5;

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/12/phase_in_a_psyc.html

Caplan, Bryan. 2013B. “The Myopic Empiricism of the Minimum Wage.” March 12;

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/03/the_vice_of_sel.html

Caplan, Bryan. 2015. “Identificationists Beware.” June 10; http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/06/identificationi.html

Cappelli, Peter and Walter E. Block. 2012. “Debate over the minimum wage law.” Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, 7(4), December, pp. 11-33; http://addletonacademicpublishers.com/abstracts/economics-management-and-financial-markets/volume-7-4-2012/debate-over-the-minimum-wage-law.html

Clemens, Jeffrey. 2015. “The minimum wage and the great recession: evidence from the current population survey.” Working Paper 21830. http://papers.nber.org/tmp/57592-w21830.pdf

Cooper, Preston. 2016. “Hiking the Minimum Wage Killed Almost as Many Low-End Jobs as Did the Economic Collapse.” January 9; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/hiking-minimum-wage-killed-almost-as.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Cordato, Roy. 2016. “The Minimum Wage: Taking Away the Right to Work.” August 10;

https://mises.org/blog/minimum-wage-taking-away-right-work

Coyne, Andrew. 2018. “Why a guaranteed minimum income is a better option than raising the minimum wage. This is the fundamental weakness of the minimum wage: you can force business to pay their employees more, but you can’t force them to hire them.” January 5; http://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-why-a-guaranteed-minimum-income-is-a-better-option-than-raising-the-minimum-wage

Deere, Donald, Murphy, Kevin M., Welch, Finis. 1995.  “Employment and the 1990-91 Minimum-Wage Hike.”  American Economic Review. 85, no. 2, May, pp. 232-237.

Dorobat, Carmen Elena. 2017. “Good Economics Is ‘Bizarre’ for Minimum Wage Supporters.” January 13; https://mises.org/blog/good-economics-bizarre-minimum-wage-supporters

Friedman, Milton. Undated. “A minimum-wage law is, in reality, a law that makes it illegal for an employer to hire a person with limited skills.” http://izquotes.com/quote/306121http://books.google.com/books?id=ck6bXqt5shkC&pg=PA292&lpg=PA292&dq=Playboy+Milton+Friedman:+%E2%80%9CA+minimum-wage+law+is,+in+reality,+a+law+that+makes+it+illegal+for+an+employer+to+hire+a+person+with+limited+skills.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=oBhaVzo4_o&sig=tPYbXajMPWQADdFdRvvbUvPXsbs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QoU4U-fSIKeisQTIyoGQBQ&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Playboy%20Milton%20Friedman%3A%20%E2%80%9CA%20minimum-wage%20law%20is%2C%20in%20reality%2C%20a%20law%20that%20makes%20it%20illegal%20for%20an%20employer%20to%20hire%20a%20person%20with%20limited%20skills.%E2%80%9D&f=false

Gallaway, Lowell and Douglas Adie. 1995. Review of Card and Krueger’s Myth and

Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage, Cato Journal, Volume 15, no.1

http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj15n1-8.html

Galles, Gary. 2014. “Cognitive Dissonance on Minimum Wages and Maximum Rents.” April 15; https://mises.org/library/cognitive-dissonance-minimum-wages-and-maximum-rents

Gitis, Ben. 2014. “How Minimum Wage Increased Unemployment and Reduced Job Creation in 2013” March 30; http://americanactionforum.org/research/how-minimum-wage-increased-unemployment-and-reduced-job-creation-in-2013

Hanke, Steve H. 2014A. “Minimum Wage Laws Kill Jobs.” January 29;

http://www.cato.org/blog/minimum-wage-laws-kill-jobs

Hanke, Steve H. 2014B. “Let the Data Speak: The Truth Behind Minimum Wage Laws.” Globe Asia, April; http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/let-data-speak-truth-behind-minimum-wage-laws

Hazlitt, Henry. 2008 [1946]. Economics in One Lesson. Auburn, AL: Mises Institute;

http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf

Howland, David. 2013. “Increased Minimum Wage, Decreased Economic Prosperity.”  November 16; http://mises.ca/posts/blog/increased-minimum-wage-decreased-economic-prosperity/

Hunter, Brittany. 2017. “What Puerto Rico Can Teach Us About the Minimum Wage.” January 5; https://mises.org/blog/what-puerto-rico-can-teach-us-about-minimum-wage

Klein, Daniel B. and Stewart Dompe. 2007. “Reasons for Supporting the Minimum Wage: Asking Signatories of the ‘Raise the Minimum Wage’ Statement,” Econ Journal Watch. Vol. 4, No. 1, January, pp. 125-167

sburg, Steven E.  2004. “The sin of wages; the real reason to oppose the minimum wage. Slate. July 9. http://slate.msn.com/id/2103486

Lingenfelter, Jonathan, Jose Dominguez, Leandra Garcia, Bryce Mayon and Walter E. Block. 2017. “Closing the Gap: Why Minimum Wage Laws Disproportionately Harm African-Americans.” Economics, Management, and Financial Markets; 12(1): 11–24; http://141.164.71.80/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/RE:%20Closing%20the%20Gap:%20Why%20Minimum%20Wage%20Laws%20Disproportionately%20Harm%20African-Americans.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_1-Lingenfelter%20et%20al..pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/1-Lingenfelter%20et%20al..pdf?attach=1; pw: AddletonAP2009

https://www.addletonacademicpublishers.com/743-economics-management-and-financial-markets/volume-12-1-2017/2737-closing-the-gap-why-minimum-wage-laws-disproportionately-harm-african-americans; the password is: AddletonAP2009.  https://www.addletonacademicpublishers.com/743-economics-management-and-financial-markets/volume-12-1-2017/2737-closing-the-gap-why-minimum-wage-laws-disproportionately-harm-african-americans

McCaffrey, Matt. 2014. “IKEA’s ‘Minimum Wage.’” July 4;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/07/ikeas-minimum-wage.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen. 2016. “The Secret History of the Minimum Wage; The eugenicists’ favorite economic regulation.” June 12; http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/12/the-secret-history-of-the-mini

McCormick, Paul and Walter E. Block. 2000. “The Minimum Wage: Does it Really Help Workers,” Southern Connecticut State University Business Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, Fall-Spring, pp. 77-80.

McMaken, Ryan. 2016. “Four States Vote to Punish Low-Skilled Workers With Minimum Wage Hikes.” November 19; https://mises.org/blog/four-states-vote-punish-low-skilled-workers-minimum-wage-hikes

Mercer, Ilana. 2015. “Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly’ In The Ivy League.” May 10;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/05/minimum-wage-maximum-folly-in-ivy-league.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Murphy, Robert P. 2014. “Economists debate the minimum wage.” February 3;

http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2014/Murphyminimumwage.html

Murphy, Robert P. 2015A. “The Minimum Wage ‘Experiments.’” June 16; https://mises.ca/posts/blog/the-minimum-wage-experiments/

Murphy, Robert P. 2015A. “Robert Reich Shills for $15 Minimum Wage.” June 22;

https://mises.ca/posts/blog/robert-reich-shills-for-15-minimum-wage/

Neumark, David and Wascher, William. 1992. “Employment Effects of Minimum and Subminimum Wages: Panel Data on State Minimum Wage Laws.”  Industrial and Labor Relations Review 46 (October), pp. 55-81.

Neumark, David and William Wascher. 1995. “Minimum wage effects on employment and school enrollment.” Journal of Business Economics and Statistics. Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 199-207.

Neumark, David and Wascher, William. 2007. Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research David Neumark and William Wascher NBER Working Paper No. 12663 http://www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf

Neumark, David. 2014. “Employment effects of minimum wages When minimum wages are introduced or raised, are there fewer jobs? Global evidence says yes.” IZA World of Labor: 6, pp. 1-10; https://wol.iza.org/uploads/articles/6/pdfs/employment-effects-of-minimum-wages.pdf

Neumark, David. 2015. “The Effects of Minimum Wages on Employment.” FRBSF Economic Letter. http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2015/december/effects-of-minimum-wage-on-employment/

Newman, Jonathan. 2016. California Weighs a $15 Per Hour Minimum Wage.” March 28; https://mises.org/blog/california-weighs-15-hour-minimum-wage

North, Gary. 2014. “How Minimum Wage Laws Promote Racial Discrimination.” July 19; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/07/gary-north/want-young-black-males-to-get-jobs/

North, Gary. 2016. “Labor Unions and the Minimum Wage: ‘We Got Ours — Screw You.’” May 2; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/05/gary-north/got-screw/

North, Gary. 2017. “The Unstated Logic of Every Minimum Wage Law.” November 9;

https://www.garynorth.com/public/17354.cfm

Perry, Mark. 2016A. “What a $15 an Hour Minimum Wage Law Can and Cannot Do.”  May 22; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/05/what-15-hour-minimum-wage-law-can-and.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Perry, Mark. 2016B. “Black Unemployment Matters.” July 14;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/07/black-unemployment-matters.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Powell, Benjamin. 2013. “Krugman Contra Krugman on the Minimum Wage?” December 12;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-powell/krugman-minimum-wage_b_4428174.html

Reisman, George. 2014. “How Minimum Wage Laws Increase Poverty.” April 4; https://mises.org/library/how-minimum-wage-laws-increase-poverty

Reisman, George. 2016. “The State Against Economic Law: the Case of Minimum Wage Legislation.” January 4; http://researchroom.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/the-state-against-economic-law-case-of.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 1988. “Outlawing Jobs: The Minimum Wage, Once More.”  The Free Market.  Auburn, AL: The Ludwig von Mises Institute, December, 1, 7-8; https://archive.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard315.htmlhttps://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard124.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 2015A. “On the minimum wage.”July 29;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/07/murray-rothbard-on-minimum-wage.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Rothbard, Murray N. 2015B. “The Crippling Nature of Minimum-Wage Laws.” November 6; https://mises.ca/posts/articles/the-crippling-nature-of-minimum-wage-laws/

Rustici, Thomas. 1985. “A public choice view of the minimum wage.” Cato Journal. Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 103-131; http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1985/5/cj5n1-6.pdf

Salerno, Joseph T. 2006. “The Indirect Effects of Raising the Minimum Wage.” November 10; https://mises.org/blog/indirect-effects-raising-minimum-wage

Salihu, Bardhyl N. 2013. “Bending the Laws of Economics.” February 19;

http://mises.ca/posts/articles/bending-the-laws-of-economics

Saltsman, Michael. 2015. “Minimum Wage Hike Forces a Nonprofit Restaurant to Close.” January 5; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/01/minimum-wage-hike-forces-nonprofit.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Schiff, Peter. Undated. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLr5oWfoWRY&list=TLC1qFv76XMgWqS88S248kyGa-_uB-d-to

Sohr, Kevin and Walter E. Block. 1997. “The Minimum Wage,” The Freeman Ideas on Liberty, November, pp. 681-682.

Sowell, Thomas. 1995. “Repealing the Law of Gravity,” Forbes, May 22; p. 82.

Sowell, Thomas. 2000. Basic Economics: A Citizen’s Guide to the Economy. New York, N.Y.: Basic Books; (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/04/what-is-real-minimum-wage.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29: “Minimum wage laws make it illegal to pay less than the government-specified price for labor. By the simplest and most basic economics, a price artificially raised tends to cause more to be supplied and less to be demanded than when prices are left to be determined by supply and demand in a free market. The result is a surplus, whether the price that is set artificially high is that of farm produce or labor.

Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker’s productivity worth that amount—and, if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed. Yet minimum wage laws are almost always discussed politically in terms of the benefits they confer on workers receiving those wages. Unfortunately, the real minimum wage is always zero, regardless of the laws, and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage, because they either lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force.”)

Sowell, Thomas. 2013. “Why racists love the minimum wage laws.”  September 17; http://nypost.com/2013/09/17/why-racists-love-the-minimum-wage-laws/

Tamny, John. 2017. “The Left/Right Crack-Up Over Seattle and the Minimum Wage.” July 6; https://mises.org/blog/leftright-crack-over-seattle-and-minimum-wage

Thornton, Mark. 2016. “Mandating Higher Wages Won’t Fix Japan’s Economy.” November 17;

https://mises.org/blog/mandating-higher-wages-wont-fix-japans-economy

Vedder, Richard K., and Lowell Gallaway. 2001. “Does the Minimum Wage Reduce Poverty?” Employment Policies Institute, June. http://epionline.org/studies/vedder_06-2001.pdf

Vuk, Vedran. 2006. Professor Stiglitz and the Minimum Wage.” September 4; http://mises.org/daily/2266

charlatan

Wanniski, Jude. 1998. The Way the World Works. https://www.amazon.com/Way-World-Works-Gateway-Contemporary/dp/0895263440/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&qid=1484502765&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Way+the+World+Works&linkCode=sl1&tag=economiccom0e-20&linkId=0e06ac29ce51d812feb2f6318f3eee04

Wenzel, Robert. 2013. “The Wrong Way to Argue Against Minimum Wage Laws.” February 17; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/02/the-wrong-way-to-argue-against-minimum.html

Wenzel, Robert. 2015. “How Minimum Wage Increases Went Bad in San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle and Beyond.” June 10;  http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/06/how-minimum-wage-increases-went-bad-in.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Wenzel, Robert. 2016. “Tyler Cowen on the Two Economists That Lefties Use to Prop Up Their Minimum Wage Hike Advocacy.” January 5; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/tyler-cowen-on-two-economists-that.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Wenzel, Robert. 2019. Problems With Bryan Caplan’s “Why I’m Not an Austrian Economist” (Part 4). February 28; https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2019/02/problems-with-bryan-caplans-why-im-not.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+economicpolicyjournal/KpwH+(EconomicPolicyJournal.com).

Wiegold, Benjamin M. 2014. “The High Cost of Minimum Wages” May 30;

https://mises.org/library/high-cost-minimum-wages-0

Williams, Walter, E. 2005. “Victimhood: Rhetoric or Reality.” June 9;

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4255

Williams, Walter, E. 2011. Race and Economics: How Much Can Be Blamed on Discrimination? Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.

Williams, Walter E. 2015A “Historical Ignorance.” July 13; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/walter-e-williams/the-war-of-1861/

Williams, Walter E. 2015B. Legal and Academic Equality Nonsense. August 4; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/08/walter-e-williams/equality-nonsense-2/

Williams, Walter, E. 1982. The State Against Blacks, New York, McGraw-Hill.

Williams, Walter, E. 2013. “Higher Minimum Wages.” February 27;

https://archive.lewrockwell.com/williams-w/w-williams158.html

Williams, Walter, E. 2014A. “Politics and Minimum Wage.” January 8;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/walter-e-williams/attacking-those-who-cant-fight-back/

Williams, Walter, E. 2014B. “The State Against Blacks and the Minimum Wage.” http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/05/walter-e-williams-state-against-blacks.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Williams, Walter, E. 2014C. “Embarrassing Economists.” October 21;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/10/walter-e-williams/embarrassing-economists/

Williams, Walter, E. 2015A. “Self-Enforcing Discrimination.” March 31;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/03/walter-e-williams/minimum-and-maximum-prices/

Williams, Walter, E. 2015B. “Embarrassing Economists.” May 10;

http://researchroom.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/05/embarrassing-economists.html

Williams, Walter, E. 2016. “The Arrogant Elite,” June 8;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/06/walter-e-williams/arrogant-elite/

Williams, Walter, E. 2017. “Conflicting Visions.” August 2;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/08/walter-e-williams/dishonest-economists-vs-reality/

Williams, Walter, E. Undated.

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/11/powerful-walter-williams-comments-on.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

European countries:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/04/minimum-wage-and-youth-unemployment.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

http://www.amazon.com/Minimum-Wages-David-Neumark/dp/0262515083

http://www.nber.org/papers/w12663

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/econ/sempapers/Neumark.pdf

http://www.epionline.org/studies/Neumark-01-2013.pdf

http://imageshack.com/a/img707/4291/pvxm.jpg

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-12/biggest-threat-minimum-wage-restaurant-workers-everywhere

Badavas and Block, 1997; Block, 1983, 1985, 1986A, 1986B, 1986C, 1987, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2013, 2014A, 2014B, 2014C, 2014D, 2014E; Block and Barnett II, 2002; Block and Blundell, 2006; Block, Dauterive and Levendis. 2007; Block and Quigley, 2002; Cappelli and Block, 2012; Greene, Henry, Nathanson and Block, 2007; Hovenga, Naik and Block. 2013; McCormick and Block, 2000; Schuldt, Woodall and Block, 2012; Sohr and Block, 1997.

Badavas, Vicky and Walter E. Block. 1997. “The $4.25/Hour Syndrome,” The Chalcedon Report, May, No. 382, pp. 17-19; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Completed%20Scanned%20Material.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_3_Chalcedon%20Report%20No.%20382%20May%201997.pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/Chalcedon%20Report%20No.%20382%20May%201997.pdf?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 1983. “Why minimum-wage law is often against low-pay worker?” in Sexty, Robert W., ed. Issues in Canadian Business, Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall, Canada, p. 139; reprinted from 10/25/80 “Why minimum-wage law is often against low-pay worker?” The Financial Post, p. 24; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Fwd:%20Cleaned%20up%20Block%20Articles%20%231.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_FIN%20POST%20(Min%20Wage)%20OCT%2025,%201980.rtf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/FIN%20POST%20(Min%20Wage)%20OCT%2025,%201980.rtf?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 1985. “Minimum wage law no help to unskilled,” The Financial Post, August 17; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Renewed%20Block%20Articles.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_FIN%20POST%20-%20Min%20Wge%20Law%20No%20Hlp%20Unskilled%20-%20AUG%2017%201985.pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/FIN%20POST%20-%20Min%20Wge%20Law%20No%20Hlp%20Unskilled%20-%20AUG%2017%201985.pdf?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 1986A. “It hurts those it would help,” The Vancouver Sun, January 11, p.A6; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Fwd:%20Block%20Articles.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_The%20Sun%20%20-%20It%20Hrts%20those%20it%20wld%20Hlp%20-%20JAN%2011%201986.rtf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/The%20Sun%20%20-%20It%20Hrts%20those%20it%20wld%20Hlp%20-%20JAN%2011%201986.rtf?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 1986B. “La conspiration du silence sur le salaire minimum,” June, 26 ; Point de Vue, p. B4.

Block, Walter E. 1986C. “Minimum wage is what keeps youth out of work,” The Gazette, April 10; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Completed%20Revised%20Block%20Articles.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_COMMENT%20-THE%20GAZETTE-minimum%20wage%20-%20APR%2010%201986.doc/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/COMMENT%20-THE%20GAZETTE-minimum%20wage%20-%20APR%2010%201986.doc?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 1987. “Minimum Wage Law No Help to Unskilled,” Dateline Canada: Understanding Economics Through Press Reports, pp. 37.

Block, Walter E. 1996. “Labor Market Disputes: A Comment on Albert Rees’ ‘Fairness in Wage Distribution,’” Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 217-230; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/labormarketdisputes.htm

Block, Walter E. 2000.  “Heritage Stumbles on Minimum Wage,” The Free Market, October, Volume 18, Number 10; http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.asp?control=324

Block, Walter E. 2001. “The Minimum Wage: A Reply to Card and Krueger,” Journal of The Tennessee Economics Association, Spring, http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/block_minimum-wage-once-again_2001.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2002. “Delusions of rising wages,” New Orleans City Business, January 28, p. 28;http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Completed%20Scanned%20Material.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_Delusions%20of%20Rising%20Wages%20-%20New%20Orleans%20City%20Business%20Jan.%2028%202002.pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/Delusions%20of%20Rising%20Wages%20-%20New%20Orleans%20City%20Business%20Jan.%2028%202002.pdf?attach=1

Block, Walter E. 2004 “A Primer on Jobs and the Jobless.” March, 9; http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1466; translation into Dutch: www.meervrijheid.nl/werkwerkloosheid.htmhttp://liberalismo.org/autor/block/ http://www.jorgevalin.com/artic/trad/empleo_block.htmhttp://www.kiosco.com.mx/Sem/edit/Archivos/ArchForo/40402Foro.htmlhttp://www.walterblock.com/translations.php

Portuguese translation: http://acao-humana.blogspot.com/2007/04/razes-do-desemprego-e-de-sua-cura.html

DTU translated into Persian?

‘Pashton Baha’ <pashtoonbaha2@gmail.com>

Block, Walter E. 2013. “Warren’s Unwarranted Wage.” March 26;

http://mises.org/preview/6389/Warrens-Unwarranted-Wage

http://www.mises.org/daily/6389/Elizabeth-Warrens-Unwarranted-Wage

https://mises.org/library/elizabeth-warrens-unwarranted-wage

Block, Walter E. 2014A. “The Minimum Wage Law.” January 17;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/walter-e-block/want-to-stab-the-poor-and-help-labor-unions/http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/01/the-hardcore-austrian-school-and.htmlhttp://lockerroom.johnlocke.org/2014/01/17/walter-block-versus-economists-who-want-to-raise-the-minimum-wage/http://libertycrier.com/want-to-stab-the-poor-and-help-labor-unions/?utm_source=The+Liberty+Crier&utm_campaign=2b836d4a7b-The_Liberty_Crier_Daily_News_1_17_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_600843dec4-2b836d4a7b-284768769http://libertycrier.com/want-to-stab-the-poor-and-help-labor-unions/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LibertyCrier+%28Liberty+Crier%29http://prudentinvestornewsletters.blogspot.com/2014/01/walter-block-on-why-minimum-wage-law-is.html

Block, Walter E. 2014B. “Letter to the Economic Policy Institute on the minimum wage law.” March 1; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/02/walter-block-responds-to-economic.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Block, Walter E. 2014C:  February 17, 2014. Moore, Caegan [mailto:cmoore@wwltv.com]. The 504 – Guest Appearance; Caegan Moore Producer, The 504 WWL-TV/ Channel 4, “minimum wage law.” (504) 529-6441 | (504) 529-6472 (Fax) | cmoore@wwltv.com

1024 N. Rampart St. | New Orleans, LA 70116; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/walter-block-on-the-wupl-news-station-explaining-minimum-wage/http://www.wwltv.com/on-tv/wupl/Eliminate-the-minimum-wage-246265011.htmlhttp://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/06/hey-cmkshama-watch-this-walter-block.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Block, Walter E. 2014D. “The Minimum Wage Law and Welfare Payments.” June 6;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/06/walter-e-block/walter-block-influenced-by-left-wing-jesuits/http://mises.ca/posts/articles/the-minimum-wage-law-and-welfare-payments/?utm_source=Ludwig+von+Mises+Institute+of+Canada+Daily+List&utm_campaign=e9138a36da-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6c2fea3584-e9138a36da-209944333#comments

Block, Walter E. 2014E. February 17, 2014. Moore, Caegan [mailto:cmoore@wwltv.com]. The 504 – Guest Appearance; Caegan Moore Producer, The 504 WWL-TV/ Channel 4, “minimum wage law.” (504) 529-6441 | (504) 529-6472 (Fax) | cmoore@wwltv.com

1024 N. Rampart St. | New Orleans, LA 70116; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/walter-block-on-the-wupl-news-station-explaining-minimum-wage/http://www.wwltv.com/on-tv/wupl/Eliminate-the-minimum-wage-246265011.htmlhttp://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2014/06/hey-cmkshama-watch-this-walter-block.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2015/12/dr-walter-block-on-scrapping-minimum.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2002. “The Living Wage: What’s Wrong,” Ideas on Liberty, December, Vol. 52, No. 12, pp.23-24; http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=4533

Block, Walter vs Boyd Blundell. 2006. “Unions: Social Benefactors or Gangs of Thugs?” November 10; https://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block64.htmlhttp://mises.org/multimedia/block/Block-Blundell-Debate-2007.wmvblundel@loyno.edu.

http://mises.org/media/2092/Labor-Unions-and-the-Minimum-Wage-A-Debatehttp://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/08/circus-act-thursday-will-it-come-to.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HTWy_vZfgE

Block, Walter E., Jerry Dauterive and John Levendis. 2007. “Globalization and the Concept of Subsistence Wages.” Journal of Income Distribution. Vol. 16, No. 1, March; pp. 74-88; http://www.jid-online.org/

Block, Walter and William Quigley. 2002. New Orleans, LA, Loyola University, Debate between Professors Walter Block, Economics, and William Quigley, Law School on “The Preferential Option for the Poor: Free Markets vs. Government Intervention and the minimum wage law,” May 7, sponsored by the Economics Club and the Loyola Poverty Law Center

Cappelli, Peter and Walter E. Block. 2012. “Debate over the minimum wage law.” Economics, Management, and Financial Markets, 7(4), December, pp. 11-33; http://addletonacademicpublishers.com/abstracts/economics-management-and-financial-markets/volume-7-4-2012/debate-over-the-minimum-wage-law.html

Greene, Zoe, Sally Henry, Coby Nathanson and Walter E. Block. 2007. “Negative Impacts of Minimum Wage and anti Sweatshop Legislation” Humanomics Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 83-92; http://tinyurl.com/27fj7f

Hovenga, Claire, Devaja Naik and Walter E. Block. 2013. “The Detrimental Side Effects of Minimum Wage Laws.” Business and Society Review; Winter, Volume 118, Issue 4, pp. 463-487; http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/basr.2013.118.issue-2/issuetoc;

http://bestsetonlineproofing.toppanbestset.com/php/welcome.php?PDF=NDE3Mg==&Proof=QXV0aG9yUmV2aWV3&review=cmhoveng@loyno.edu,dsnaik@loyno.edu,wblock@loyno.eduhttp://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.htmlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/basr.2013.118.issue-4/issuetochttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/basr.12018/abstracthttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/basr.12018/full

McCormick, Paul and Walter E. Block. 2000. “The Minimum Wage: Does it Really Help Workers,” Southern Connecticut State University Business Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, Fall-Spring, pp. 77-80; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/minimum_wage.pdfhttp://www.academia.edu/1514258/The_Minimum_Wage_Does_it_Really_Help_Workers;

Schuldt, Robert, Davis Woodall and Walter E. Block.  2012. “Drowning the Poor in Excessive Wages: The Problems of the Minimum Wage Law” Humanomics, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp.258 – 269; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=17062401&ini=aob; 10.1108/08288661211277326

Sohr, Kevin and Walter E. Block. 1997.  “Minimum Wage,” Freeman, Vol. 47, No. 11, November, pp. 681-682. http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=3896

Spain:

Wenzel, Robert. 2013B. “Finally Some Economic Sense in Spain.” June 3; http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/06/finally-some-economic-sense-in-spain.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29

Jimenez, Miguel. 2013. “Bank of Spain recommends suspending minimum wage to tackle unemployment.” May 31;

http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/05/31/inenglish/1370013481_405760.html

Yale Brozen, “The Effect of Statutory Minimum Wage Increases on Teen-Age Unemployment,” 12 The Journal of Law and Economics (1969), at 109ff.; Benewitz and Weintraub, “Employment Effects of a Local Minimum Wage,” 17 Industrial and Labor Relations Review (1964), at 276ff.; Douty, “Some Effects of the $1.00 Minimum Wage in the United States,” 27 Economica (New Series, 1960), at 137ff.; Peterson, “Employment Effects of State Minimum Wages for Women: Three Historical Cases Re-Examined,” in 12 Industrial and Labor Relations Review (1959), at 406ff.; Peterson, “Employment Effects of Minimum Wages: 1938-1950,” 65 Journal of Political Economy (1957), at 412ff.; Stigler, “The Economics of Minimum Wage Legislation,” 36 American Economic Review (1946), at 358ff.

Share

2:20 am on February 22, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Conversations with Tim McGraw About Austro-libertarianism and Much More

Letter 1

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2021 11:57 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Murray Rothbard on Anarchy vs. Mini-archy

Dear Walter, January 19th, 2021

I apologize for using the large font, but my eyesight isn’t so good anymore. I read your last reply to me about DC being destroyed with some confusion. You did see my point about the “10 righteous men.” But then you mention the Libertarian Party members and think tanks in DC as if they should be spared.

You said years ago that Murray Rothbard convinced you that anarchy was the only way to go. You can’t have a government and a free society. Have you changed your mind?

Just now I watched about 15 minutes of a puff piece about Kamala Harris (raised in Oakland, CA) put out by a SF TV station. Truly pathetic it was. And then I watched about 15 minutes of Trump’s farewell speech. Truly pathetic it was.

Find me ten righteous men in politics and I’ll believe in governments. I doubt if you’ll find them. Rothbard was right. The whole damned idea of government is evil and wrong.

Tell your friends in DC to get the hell outta there.

Sorry about Drew Brees and the Saints.

All the best,

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

Dear Tim:

I do NOT believe that a little government is okay. But I believe that many limited government libertarians are righteous people. As are apolitical people who live in WDC. And, I don’t think I’ve just contradicted myself.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 4:17 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Re: Murray Rothbard on Anarchy vs. Mini-archy

Dear Walter,

Okay, that’s three righteous men, and you are a righteous man. But you are the one who wants to privatize everything. You and Rothbard are the ones who convinced me that even a little government is impossible in a free society. Privatize everything.

If you now believe that a little government is okay, then I misunderstood your position.

All the best,

Tim

—–Original Message—–

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

To: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Wed, Jan 20, 2021 1:40 pm

Subject: RE: Murray Rothbard on Anarchy vs. Mini-archy

Dear Tim:

Non anarchists include Ron Paul, Andrew Napolitano, Bob Nozick. I think they are very righteous.

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 2

Dear Tim:

The LP has its office there. There are lots of libertarian think tanks there. But, I get your point.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 12:55 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Re: A Flawed Impeachment for “Incitement”

Dear Walter,

Find ten righteous people in DC and it will be spared.

Tim

“In the Genesis account, God reveals to Abraham that Sodom and Gomorrah are to be destroyed for their grave sins(18:20). Abraham pleads for the lives of any righteous people living there, especially the lives of his nephew, Lot, and his family. God agrees to spare the cities if 10 righteous people can be found (18:23–32). Two angels are sent to Lot in Sodom but are met with a wicked mob who are then struck blind by the angelic guests (19:1–11). Finding only Lot and his family as righteous among the inhabitants, the angels warn Lot to quickly evacuate the city and to not look back. As they flee the destruction, Lot’s wife looks back upon the city and is turned into a pillar of salt (19:12–29).”

—–Original Message—–

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

To: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2021 8:31 am

Subject: RE: A Flawed Impeachment for “Incitement”

Dear Tim:

Lot’s of innocent people live in WDC.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 12:52 AM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: RE: A Flawed Impeachment for “Incitement”

Hi Walter, January 14th, 2021

I just read your recent article posted on the Lew Rockwell site. Your arguments are sound, but I wonder why you give a shit? I wonder why my parents, who are your age, hasten to vote and fill out their census forms. Even Ron Paul still believes in the system. I suppose it is a generational thing. You all went through the Depression and WWII when America was united and the government was still kinda honest.

For us baby boomer Libertarians the Vietnam War draft lottery convinced us very quickly that DC and government in general was completely full of shit.

Walter, I go to bed every night praying that DC is blown up and sent to Hell. Do not pass “GO”. Do not collect 100 trillion dollars.

I wonder what the generations coming up behind us will do?

Here in Healdsburg, CA we are in Day  # 310 or so of this damned lockdown. My wife and I are going a bit mad. No bars. No restaurants. No church. No spas. No hotels. No haircuts. No government schools, though the Catholic school across the street is open. Oh, those poor kids wearing masks. That is a SIN, Walter. God will not forgive the authorities for masking his children.

But yeah, my wife and I are going nuts.

Hope you are doing okay in New Orleans.

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

PS: I’ll attach a photo my friend Patrick took in Hollywood two days ago as he drove by Ripley’s Believe it or Not. The dinosaur on the roof is wearing a mask and the windows are boarded up. That’s California. Even Godzilla must comply.

TJM

Letter 3

Dear Tim:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2020 2:48 AM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: RE: Open Letter to Libertarians in Georgia

Hi Walter,

Oh, Walter; I disagree with your latest column on the Lew Rockwell site. I don’t disagree with your right to publish it or say it, but I think your arguments are weak. The Empire is bankrupt and going down the toilet. Does it really matter who is in that DC cesspool? The 74 million Americans who voted for Trump are on the edge of open rebellion.

Let it come. The Republic is dead. The USA needs to be broken up into much smaller nations. This house is divided against itself. Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall.

Attorney Lin Wood who is prosecuting the case of voter fraud in Georgia told the voters to NOT vote for the two GOP senatorial candidates. Where were these two RINOs when the election was stolen from Trump? And I don’t support Trump, but I know when a guy has been stabbed in the back.

The time for words is ending. Voting is a joke. When the people get hungry, all hell is going to break loose. Or maybe people will just give up and die? Is that the elite’s plan?

I remember a man once wrote, “A suicide doesn’t just kill himself. He kills everybody.”

Sometimes I think the elites are committing suicide. These are not happy people.

Get ready, Walter. Protect yourself and your family.

All the best,

Tim

Letter 4

Dear Tim:

Libertarians support only negative rights. The so called right to breathe freely is a positive right. Libertarians don’t support that. When you are underwater, or on Mars, you can’t breathe freely. Are your rights then necessarily violated. No.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2020 2:46 AM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Does the owner of a business have the authority to force a customer to wear a mask to enter his property?

Dear Walter, Dec. 3, 2020

Many Libertarians argue that a business owner can demand that a person entering their business (store, plane, uber car, etc.) wear a mask. The Libertarians argue that the business owner can demand that the customer wear a shirt, shoes, underwear, etc. so why not a mask?

Would these Libertarians argue that the business owner can demand that the person entering their business smoke a cigarette?

We are talking about the right of a human being to breathe freely. This right, imo, trumps any private property rights of the business owners.

What do you think?

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

Letter 5

Dear Tim:

I’m sorry to learn of your personal travails.

Jury duty is like a military draft. There’s nothing in the libertarian philosophy, in my view, that says you are obligated to cooperate with that institution. Ditto for voting.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 2:27 AM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Hi Walter

Hi Walter, 11/9/20

Sorry I haven’t written to you personally for awhile. Out here in Purple Tier Covid Sonoma County Land things are pretty much all shit all the time. Did I tell you the story about the house painter who saw my wife approaching unmasked? The painter put an empty paint bucket over his head. Oh, the fear….

The weather has turned cold, finally. A high of 52F today and freezing temps at night. Our cat, Buddy, stays in the house now at night. Winter is short here, but very cold in our uninsulated homes. No doubt like yours in New Orleans.

My wife turns 67 tomorrow. I’ll be 69 in February. I know you are much older (much older LOL). My Mom and Dad are 88 and living in a senior center in St. Louis near my brother’s house. I’ll probably never see them again. No more golf trips to Las Vegas. Las Vegas is dead.

My son is in Phoenix. Doubt if I’ll see him again. My daughter is in Seattle. Haven’t talked to her in  years. We don’t get along.

How are you doing at Loyola? Have the barbarians burned down your office yet? Is your family okay? Did the hurricane destroy Bourbon Street?

You are older than I. You went through WWII, yes? So how do you handle the insanity?

Okay, here is a Libertarian question for you:

I just wrote to the Sonoma County Jurors office in the “Hall of Justice”, sic, in Santa Rosa asking that my name be removed from the rolls of potential jurors. I also wrote to the Sonoma County Registrar of Voters and had my name removed from the voter rolls.

My question to you is:

If the Sonoma County “Justice” Jurors Office demands my presence as a juror, do I have to go? Last time I resisted they fined me $400. I paid in cash.

What say you, Dr. Block? Can we legally opt out of the system? Or are we slaves even unto death?

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

Letter 6

Dear Tim:

I think the libertarian position on this is that the owner of the boat decides, based on any contractual arrangement he made with his passengers

Best regards,

Walter

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 11:38 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Fwd: Seen and Unseen of Covid-19: Yourself

Hi Walter,

What is the Libertarian position on death? The Titanic is sinking and only 1/3 of the ship’s company will survive. Who gets to survive? Who gets to die?

Just like with Covid-19. Do the elderly get to live as the children suffer and even die from suicide?

What is the Libertarian position on who gets to live in the tribe/society/town when Mr. Dead comes to call?

Is it still “Women and children first.” into the life boats?

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

—–Original Message—–

From: Tim McGraw <mcgrawtim123@aol.com>

To: woods@mises.org <woods@mises.org>

Sent: Thu, Oct 29, 2020 9:32 pm

Subject: RE: Seen and Unseen of Covid-19: Yourself

“This is the intellectual level of the conversation [around covid-19]: You just want people do die.” Yourself

Hi Tom,

Your opening sentence says it all. Of course people do want people to die. The people want other people to die by the millions. The people have been killing each other in the millions for thousands of years. Though in the past century the death total has skyrocketed.

So why not just say, “So what if Covid-19 kills every old person in a nursing home. I want my haircut and a drink at the pub. They had their time. Now it is mine. Fuck ’em!”

What is wrong with saying that bare statement?

What is the difference in the above statement from Curtis Lemay’s:

There are no innocent civilians, so it doesn’t bother me so much to be killing innocent bystanders.

Curtis LeMay

I mean really, what is the difference?

You explain it to me, Tom.

Tim McGraw

Healdsburg, CA

The Seen and Unseen of Covid-19 by Tom Woods

Share

2:05 am on February 22, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Conversations with Richard Gaylord on Austro-libertarianism and much more

Letter 1

Dear Richard:

Thanks. We’ll have to agree to disagree on the voting issue.

Here’s a biblio on it:

Pro: Block, 2012, 2018; Block and Fryzek, 2015; Rothbard, 1972A, 1972B; Spooner, 1870; con: McElroy, 2013; Watner, 2000; White, 2020

Block, Walter E. 2012. Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty. New York: Ishi Press; http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871873234;

http://libertycrier.com/education/walter-blocks-new-book-on-ron-paul/;

http://libertyunbound.com/node/862

Block, Walter E. 2018. “Voting; rejoinder to Casey, McElroy, Ward, Pugsley, Konkin and Barnett.” Political Dialogues: Journal of Political Theory; pp. 23-38;

http://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/DP/issue/view/1503/showToc

Block, Walter and Nathan Fryzek. 2015. “Was It Immoral to Vote for Ron Paul? And other libertarian questions and answers.” November 26;  http://www.targetliberty.com/2015/11/was-it-immoral-to-vote-for-ron-paul.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TargetLiberty+%28Target+Liberty%29

Rothbard, Murray N. 1972A. “Should Libertarians Vote?”  Outlook, April, p. 6.

Rothbard, Murray N. 1972B. “Interview.” February 25;

https://mises.org/blog/voting-immoralhttps://mises.org/library/new-banner-interview-murray-n-rothbard-0

Spooner, Lysander. 1966[1870]. No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority and A Letter to Thomas F. Bayard, Larkspur, Colorado: Rampart College; http://jim.com/treason.htm

Con:

McElroy, Wendy. 2013. “The Faux Slavery Analogy to Voting.” July 31;

http://dailyanarchist.com/2013/07/31/the-faux-slavery-analogy-to-voting/

criticizes Walter E. Block

Watner, Carl. 2000. “Is Voting an Act of Violence?” April, The Voluntaryist. No. 103; http://voluntaryist.com/articles/103.html#.VzDxM0n2Y5s

Vegetarian, anti https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63NNuG-6-hQ

White, L. Reichard. 2020. “It’s About Your Voting Fetish – – -.: October 24;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/10/l-reichard-white/its-about-your-voting-fetish/

Best regards,

Walter

From: Richard Gaylord <rjgaylord@gmail.com>

Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2020 11:45 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject:

the lesser of two evils is evil. neither Trump or Biden have libertarian views.

“Probability is the most important concept in modern science, especially as nobody has the slightest notion what it means.” – B. Russell

“Reality…What a concept.” – Robin Williams

Letter 2

Dear Richard:

At one time in his life he was a heterosexual, and had a girlfriend. At another time he was gay. Maybe that makes him bi?

He once lived in Murray Rothbard’s apartment; Murray called him Roychick.

Roy was a friend of mine. I first met him when he was a high school student, and a teacher in Colorado at a libertarian think tank. He was thin, then.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Richard Gaylord <richardjgaylord@icloud.com>

Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 3:31 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: As DOMA Collapses, I Remember Libertarian Gay Activist Roy Childs | HuffPost

was roy childs gay? this article indicates that he was.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/as-doma-collapses-i-remem_b_3537107

not becuase he was a gay activist, but because of his statement

When I met Roy Childs on November 6 1979, he was lying on his back in the middle of my friend Charles Fowler’s living room. At 387 pounds, Roy had a serious weight problem, and often felt most comfortable lying flat on his back. Without looking up he said, “You’re the famous Steve Mariotti. Thanks for your letter! You’re a handsome devil — too bad you’re straight.”

Letter 3

Dear Richard:

Yes, Trump deserves the death penalty. He murdered 5 million Jews (). But, at least, he’s not as bad as Hitler, who murdered more.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Richard Gaylord <richardjgaylord@icloud.com>

Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 2:02 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: A Flawed Impeachment for ‘Incitement’ | Chronicles

i suppose that impeaching, convicting and barring Trump from federal office is a slightly better solution to Trump than putting a bullet in his head but choosing between them would be a close call for me (of course, i would include the idiot children, Eric and Don Jr and Ivanka, and Jared and McConnell). i would prefer to get rid of despicable human beings like Trump permanently but disgracing and humiliating them in public works too.

https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/blog/a-flawed-impeachment-for–incitement-/

Dear :

Best regards,

Walter

Share

2:02 am on February 22, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Dear Marc:

I wrote this on that subject:

Block, Walter E. 2012. “Global Warming, Air Pollution and Libertarianism.” January 18; https://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block195.html

I think the burden of proof on global warming rests with those who advocate this thesis, and they have not come even close to meeting it.

Best regards,

Walter

read from the bottom up

From: Marc J. Victor

Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 7:51 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: Andrew Marcantel <andy@attorneysforfreedom.com>

Subject: Re: New Libertarian Project

Hi Walter.  I just finished reading everything you sent on coronavirus.  It’s striking to me how we have both been pondering the exact same issues.  I’m curious to read your writings on global warming as I have the same concerns about the facts as you highlight for coronavirus.  I’d have a few more things to say about jury nullification as I agree with you the NAP/3LP doesn’t solve everything.  Also, I think mens rea should be more relevant to the analysis.  I’d sure like to sit and think through some of these issues with you sometime over a few hours.  It helps focus my own thinking.  I touched some of these issues in my book, but in a more cursory way.  I’m interested to get your thoughts.

Excellent work!

Marc

________________________________________

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2020 10:31 AM

To: Marc J. Victor

Subject: RE: New Libertarian Project

Dear Mark:

Good to talk to you today. Here are my homework assignments:

1.Why libt is a hard sell (sociobiology); I think this is the most important, so I’m putting it on the top:

Levendis, John, Walter E. Block and Robert B. Eckhardt.  2019. “Evolutionary psychology, economic freedom, trade and benevolence.” Review of Economic Perspectives – Národohospodářský obzor; Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 73-92; https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/revecp/19/2/article-p73.xml; 10.2478/revecp-2019-0005; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/revecp-2019-0005https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/here-is-one-of-my-best-scholarly-papers-ever/https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/evolutionary-psychology-economic-freedom-trade-and-benevolence

In no particular order:

2. continuums:

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2008. “Continuums” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics, Vol. 1, pp. 151-166, June; http://www2.units.it/~etica/http://www2.units.it/~etica/2008_1/BLOCKBARNETT.pdf

3. animal rights:

Montgomery, Stephen and Walter E. Block. 2016. “Animal torture and thick libertarianism.” Review of Social and Economic Issues (RSEI), Vol 1, No. 3, Spring, pp. 105-116. http://rsei.rau.ro/images/V1N3/Articol_5.pdfhttp://www.rebe.rau.ro/RePEc/rau/rseijr/SP16/RSEI-SP16-A5.pdf

Block, Walter E. and Steven Craig. 2017. “Animal torture.”  The Review of Social and Economic Issues (RSEI); http://rsei.rau.ro/index.php/lasthttp://rsei.rau.ro/index.php/10-published-issues/10-volume-1-number-4

Block, Walter E. https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/two-challenges-to-libertarianism/

Block, Walter E. 2020. “On Huemer on Ethical Veganism.” Studia Humana.

Volume 9:2, pp. 53-68; DOI: 10.2478/sh-2020-0013;

http://studiahumana.com/wyd,34.htmlhttp://studiahumana.com/pliki/wydania/10443-Volume9_Issue2-07_paper.pdfhttps://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/sh/9/2/article-p53.xml; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/Downloads/[22990518%20-%20Studia%20Humana]%20On%20Huemer%20on%20Ethical%20Veganism.pdf;

https://doi.org/10.2478/sh-2020-0013 |

4. Pandemic:

Block, Walter E. Forthcoming. “A libertarian analysis of the Covid-19 pandemic.” Journal of Libertarian Studies

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Quarantines.” March 10;

https://www.targetliberty.com/2020/03/walter-block-on-quarantines-because-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TargetLiberty+(Target+Liberty);

https://www.targetliberty.com/2020/03/walter-block-on-quarantines-because-of.html?fbclid=IwAR2eKAqVI1zJ-2d-aCW6IQwwJQQKRWJf_lcJsDxLHp9RIfNx-1fYuMzUrO8

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Coronavirus Maximus: a thought experiment on forced quarantine.” May 19; https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/coronavirus-maximus-a-thought-experiment-on-forced-quarantine/

April 13, 2020. Debate on the Coronavirus Quarantine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEjU6ejEQE. the post-debate correspondence: https://xoandelugo.org/post-debate-correspondence-between-walter-block-philipp-bagus-and-bernardo-ferrero-on-the-ethics-of-the-coronavirus-quarantine/?fbclid=IwAR1ZUOlXvdeDPDC53PdJ9ZeoQn-6SYvbNIpUv2xalgRY3a2xQ8hFHn1b35A;

Bernardo Ferrero <bernardo.96@hotmail.it>

Philipp Bagus <Philipp.Bagus@web.de>

Oscar Carreiro <o.r.carreiro2@gmail.com>

Noemi Díaz corral noemidiazcorral@gmail.com

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/vaccinations-part-ii/

LibertyTalk.FM, http://libertytalk.fm

5. Warming

Block, Walter E. 2012. “Global Warming, Air Pollution and Libertarianism.” January 18; https://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block195.html

6. reparations:

Alston and Block, 2007; Block, 1993, 2001, 2002, 2019, 2014, 2020A, 2020B; Block and Yeatts, 1999-2000; Crepelle and Block, 2017; Nouveau and Block, 2020.

Alston, Wilton D. and Walter E. Block. 2007. “Reparations, Once Again.” Human Rights Review, Vol. 9, No. 3, September, pp. 379-392; http://tinyurl.com/2b75fl

Block, Walter E. 1993. “Malcolm X,” Fraser Forum, January, pp. 18-19; http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5361.aspx

Block, Walter E. 2001. “The Moral Dimensions of Poverty, Entitlements and Theft,” The Journal of Markets and Morality, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 83-93; http://www.acton.org/publicat/m_and_m/2001_spring/block.htmlhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=922087http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marketsandmorality.com%2Findex.php%2Fmandm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F587%2F577&ei=lBn9UuLIOtDOkQe1toHwBw&usg=AFQjCNF2MZ5XoFKKMF5UcOfOT5Kv-HQgZA&sig2=VVYWZhyl0ZmAWRAKXtkxWw; Search for “Walter Block” under “Authors” here: http://www.marketsandmorality.com/index.php/mandm/search

Block, Walter E. 2002A. “On Reparations to Blacks for Slavery,” Human Rights Review, Vol. 3, No. 4, July-September, pp. 53-73;

http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/reparations_slavery.pdfhttps://link.springer.com/journal/12142/3/4/page/1https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12142-002-1003-4

(David Horowitz, Randall Robinson)

Block, Walter E. 2020B. “Return of Stolen Property: A Libertarian Case for Reparations.” December 18; https://www.theepochtimes.com/return-of-stolen-property-a-libertarian-case-for-reparations_3177301.html

Block, Walter E. 2019. “Return of Stolen Property: A Libertarian Case for Reparations.” December 23; https://www.theepochtimes.com/return-of-stolen-property-a-libertarian-case-for-reparations_3177301.html

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Reparations.” February 16;

https://www.unz.com/article/reparations/

Block, Walter E. and Guillermo Yeatts. 1999-2000. “The Economics and Ethics of Land Reform: A Critique of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace’s ‘Toward a Better Distribution of Land: The Challenge of Agrarian Reform,’” Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Law, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 37-69; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/ethics_land_reform.pdf

Crepelle, Adam and Walter E. Block. 2017. “Property Rights and Freedom:  The Keys to Improving Life in Indian Country.” Washington & Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice; Vol. 23, Issue 2, Article, 3, pp. 314-342; http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1435&context=crsjhttp://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/crsj/vol23/iss2/3/

Houma Indian

Nouveau, Lucas and Walter E. Block. 2020. “A comment on reparations for slavery.” Libertas: Segunda Epoca; http://www.journallibertas.com/online-first.html

7. Public defender

discussed

Best regards,

Walter

From: Marc J. Victor <marc@attorneysforfreedom.com>

Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 6:34 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: New Libertarian Project

Hi Walter.  Below is the link for the Sunday meeting at 10am Central time.  I’m looking forward to seeing you!

Also, in case you have nothing to do between now and Sunday, ? I’ve attached the very rough draft of my book which is intended to explain the Movement and its philosophy to the average reasonable person who never heard of libertarianism.  As you will see, several portions have yet to be written, but the important sections have been.  I’d really love your thoughts at some point.  Thanks!

________________________________________

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:18 PM

To: Marc J. Victor

Subject: RE: New Libertarian Project

Dear Mark:

We’re on for 10am central time. You’ll zoom me, right?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Marc J. Victor

Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 5:23 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: New Libertarian Project

Does Sunday 10am your time work?

Otherwise, 5pm-ish?

Let me know what’s best for you.

________________________________________

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 3:08 PM

To: Marc J. Victor

Subject: RE: New Libertarian Project

Dear Mark:

Of course. Sunday 9/13 would be better for me. I’m on central time. When’s good for you?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Marc J. Victor

Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 5:06 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: New Libertarian Project

I don’t have the words to describe how much that means to me.  Seriously.  Do you have some time to Zoom this weekend?

________________________________________

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 3:02 PM

To: Marc J. Victor

Subject: RE: New Libertarian Project

Dear Marc:

You must know I’m a big fan of yours. When I got an inkling you were asking me to do something for you, my immediate reaction was of course I’ll do it, whatever he asks. If you asked me to jump, I’d ask how high on the way up. Now that I’ve read some of the specifics, I’m with you 100%, as I fully expected I would be.

How can I be of help to you in this great initiative of yours?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Marc J. Victor

Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 4:38 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: New Libertarian Project

Hi Walter.  I hope all is well with you!  I’ve been frustrated with the libertarian movement for the past several years.  We have the best political philosophy.  We are promoting freedom for everyone.  Our political philosophy also reliably raises standards of living via the free market.  It’s almost impossible to believe that, given the curent two parties, we can’t seem to make any progress.  You and I both know that if everyone actually understood what we are saying, there would be more than enough people to achieve a free world.

We have a huge marketing problem.  As you know, our movement attracts people who act like idiots.  For the ones who don’t, we endlessly argue about implementation issues or the “best” way to promote freedom.  Although we both enjoy the discussions, we aren’t making progress.

Also, I wonder what Murry Rothbard would have to say about a world where people in China can easily create substantial threats to us here in a variety of ways.  There are many such possible threats.  I think we live in a different world that Murry couldn’t possibly envision.  I’m not saying anything was wrong with what he said, but I am saying I don’t think he could have considered today’s world.  A free society isn’t going to cut it anymore.  We need to work towards a free world.

Although the libertarian philosophy is mostly about changing the laws, we can say more about values and we need to.  Indeed, we need to if we are going to promore peace and not just freedom.

For these reasons, I think the libertarian movement needs a makeover, an update and a new marketing plan.   I’m planning to unveil the Live and Let Live Movement which will be marketed as “The World’s Only Real Peace Movement” in October 2021.  We have big plans.

I purchased www.liveandletlive.org which is currently under construction.  We are currently working on three professional videos; two very short ones to lead off with and a longer more detailed version for people with longer attention spans.  I’ve attached the script to the longer video if you are interested.  It will give you a flavor of what we are planning.

I’m writing a book entitled, “Live and Let Live: The Road to Peace, Prosperity and Happiness” which will be ready for October 2021.  I was scheduled to announce this at Freedomfest this year, but the world had other plans.  Instead, I’ll announce it at the Liberty International Conference in Colombia in January.  The Freedom Summit is now the Live and Let Live Conference which will be held in Honolulu and Phoenix annually then internationally.  The Movement will begin in the 49th most free state, Hawaii for a variety of reasons.  They badly need change there, they are ready for change, and I’m already off to a good start.

We have lots of other big plans too.  Here is what I’m asking from you:

Assuming you are interested in helping, I’d like for you to read the current draft of my book to get your thoughts on how I’m laying it all out. It is only about 50% done, but the important stuff is written.  It will take you about two hours as it is written for the average person.  However, anarchocapitalists would have no cause for disagreement. I’m not compromising on principle.  However, it is written to appeal to Socialists too.  I’m aiming for the reasonable people of the world.

I’d also like to chat with you to get your thoughts on how to roll it out.  Finally, maybe you could help us promote the Movement when it’s time?  Although I’m not aiming at libertarians, I need some to get initial interest and momentum going. You know everyone in the movement.  That said, it will only succeed if we can appeal to non-libertarians.  The website will be done soon so we can actually start promoting a prelaunch status in a few months..

Please let me know your thoughts.

Peace.

Marc

The contents of this message, together with any attachments, are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this email message in error, please notify the original sender or The Attorneys For Freedom Law Firm at (480) 755-7110 immediately by telephone or by return e-mail and delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer.  Thank you!!

“The Constitution is that sacred document that prevents the government from doing all the terrible things it does.”

Professor Butler Shaffer

Southwestern Law School

Share

4:17 am on January 10, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

In The Free Society, Would Individuals Be Allowed to Own Nuclear Weapons?

Letter 1

From: chris ar

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 3:35 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: Nuclear Weapon Ownership.

Dear Dr. Block.

You argue that owning a nuclear weapon is illegitimate because you cannot limit it’s use to the “bad” guys. A possible objection to this as pointed out in this article https://www.google.com/amp/s/miseschrist.com/2014/05/11/nuclear-weapons-free-society/amp/ is that using something and owning something are distinct.

A counterargument to this critique (in my opinion) is pointed out in this article https://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com/2012/12/23/nuclear-weapons-in-libertarianism/ Basically the author, using your methodology argues that the reason why nuclear weapons are, in almost all cases, invasive is because they are necessarily pointed at someone (or someone’s property). Since pointing a weapon (any weapon) at someone is a threat of aggression therefore nukes are invasive, since they are almost always pointed at someone.

My question is, is this your viewpoint as well? the author of the article seems to think so, he credits the argument to you. You do seem to hint at it in your own theory, or perhaps it is implied in that, if something cannot be limited(pinpointed) then of course it is pointed at everyone around you. Just wanted a clarification, if this is in fact your view as well.

Best regards,

Chris Armoutidis.

Letter 2

On Sep 23, 2020, at 3:41 PM, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Chris:

Wow. The second of these is VERY complimentary to me and my co author, who I’m taking the liberty of copying on this.

Maybe my coauthor thought of that, but, I fear, I did not. I think he makes and excellent contribution to this discussion. I only wish he were not anonymous, so I could thank him for this. His view is certainly compatible with mine, but I must credit him for pushing forward on what I take to be the Rothbardian position on this matter.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Please tell me a bit about yourself? Age, schooling, residence?

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 3

From: Michael Edelstein

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 6:31 PM

To: Walter E. Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Cc: chris ar ; Matthew Block

Subject: Re: Nuclear Weapon Ownership.

Shall guns in my apartment be banned because one might be resting on a table pointed toward a wall I share with my neighbor?

Warm regards, Michael

Co-author of Three Minute Therapy

with David Ramsay Steele, Ph.D.

Features help for anxiety, depression,

relationships, panic attacks, addiction

Letter 4

From: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 7:03 PM

To: ‘Michael Edelstein’

Cc: ‘chris ar’ ; ‘Matthew Block’

Subject: RE: Nuclear Weapon Ownership.

Dear Michael:

It all depends upon whether or not that gun pointing constitutes a threat. If your “gun” is an armor pierceing bazooka, capable of plowing through that wall, and all you need is for that “gun” to drop, or you sneeze on it in just the right way to launch the missile, then, yes, it should be banned and you’d be a criminal.

On what constitutes a threat, see this:

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2008. “Continuums” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics, Vol. 1, pp. 151-166, June; http://www2.units.it/~etica/http://www2.units.it/~etica/2008_1/BLOCKBARNETT.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

Share

4:13 am on January 10, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Letter 1

From: Wesley Downs

Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 3:05 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Papers for E4B

Hi Walter,

I wanted to followup on our Zoom call a couple weeks ago. We discussed that you might be able to make suggestions for academic papers that could be condensed into user-friendly summaries. We have a stable of students ready to start on summarization and I’m reaching back out to our professors to ask for paper recommendations. Can you suggest papers that might be relevant to a business audience? Topics such as business ethics, Austrian business cycle theory, capital allocation, consumer sovereignty, and entrepreneurship would be ideal. If you have a link or pdf for the paper that would be very helpful but if not just the title and author will do. Thank you again for volunteering to help!

Best,

Wesley

Letter 2

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020, 10:09 PM Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Wesley:

You want me to send you papers on:

business ethics, Austrian business cycle theory, capital allocation, consumer sovereignty, and entrepreneurship?

Ones that I’ve published, or others, or both?

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 3

From: Wesley Downs

Sent: Saturday, September 26, 2020 7:06 AM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: Papers for E4B

Hi Walter,

Your papers would be great but the author isn’t as important as the topic being relevant to a business audience. We’re trying to bridge the connection between academia and practical application by taking dense papers written for the academic audience and distilling it into palatable language for businessmen. Thank you!

Letter 4

Dear Wesley:

I hope this is of help to you.

On cycles:

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2009B. “Financial Intermediaries, the Intertemporal-Carry Trade, and Austrian Business Cycles; or; Crash and Carry: Can Fraudulent Time deposits lead to an Austrian Business Cycle? Yes.” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics; Vol. XI, No. 1, pp. 455-469; http://www2.units.it/~etica/2009_1/BARNETT_BLOCK.pdf

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2009. “Financial Intermediaries, the Intertemporal-Carry Trade, and Austrian Business Cycles; or; Crash and Carry: Can Fraudulent Time deposits lead to an Austrian Business Cycle? Yes.” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics; Vol. XI, No. 1, pp. 455-469; http://www2.units.it/~etica/2009_1/BARNETT_BLOCK.pdfhttp://www2.units.it/etica/2009_1/BARNETT_BLOCK.pdf

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2006. “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

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2005. “Professor Tullock on Austrian Business Cycle Theory,” Advances in Austrian Economics, Vol. 8, pp. 431-443; http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/barnett-block_tullock-austrian-business-cycle-2005.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

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

My pubs on Biz Ethics:

1. Block, Walter E. 1992. “Discrimination: An Interdisciplinary Analysis,” The Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11, No. 4, April, pp. 241-254;

http://www.walterblock.com/publications/discrimination_analysis.pdf

http://www.springerlink.com/(xssjr32ur3v4lk555se0su55)/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=searchcitationsresults,1,1http://tinyurl.com/24yojfhttp://tinyurl.com/2fwlfchttp://tinyurl.com/2gejlp

2. Block, Walter E. 1993. “Drug Prohibition: A Legal and Economic Analysis,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 12, pp. 689-700; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/drug_prohibition.pdfhttp://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=249&hid=116&sid=781cb0b0-a517-47c5-9874-ee43ba5138d5%40sessionmgr3http://tinyurl.com/23zawx

3. Block, Walter E. 1998. “Environmentalism and Economic Freedom: The Case for Private Property Rights,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 6, December, pp. 1887-1899; http://www.mises.org/etexts/environfreedom.pdf;

http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/environmentalism.htm; Romanian translation: www.antiteze.comhttp://mises.org/Etexts/Environfreedom.Pdf

4. Block, Walter E. 2001. “Cyberslacking, Business Ethics and Managerial Economics,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 225-231; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/cyberslacking.pdfhttp://www.itnews.com.au/News/60142,dont-let-your-boss-catch-you-reading-this.aspxhttp://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/cyberslacking.pdf

5. Block, Walter E. 2002. “A critique of the legal and philosophical case for rent control,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 40, pp. 75-90; http://www.mises.org/etexts/rentcontrol.pdf

6. Dreuil, Emile, James Anderson, Walter E. Block and Michael Saliba. 2003. “The Trade Gap: The Fallacy of Anti World-Trade Sentiment,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 45, No. 3, July, pp. 269-281; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/trade_gap.pdf

7. Block, Walter E. 2004. “The ‘digital divide’ is not a problem in need of rectifying,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53, No. 4, September, pp. 393-406

8. Walker, Deborah, Jerry W. Dauterive, Elyssa Schultz and Walter E. Block. 2004.  “The Feminist Competition/Cooperation Dichotomy: A Critique,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 55, No. 3, December, pp. 241-252

9. Morrel, Joseph, Walter E. Block and John Levendis. 2006. “Nuclear Power.” Journal of Business Ethics; Vol. 67, No. 1, August, pp. 37-49; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9003-y

10. Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2009. “Time deposits, dimensions and fraud,” Journal of Business Ethics; Vol. 88, No. 4, September, pp. 711-716;www.WalterBlock.com/publicationshttp://www.springerlink.com/content/100281/?k=walter+block&sortorder=asc&v=condensed&o=20http://www.springerlink.com/content/a88l166702524r55/http://blog.mises.org/archives/011398.asphttp://www.springerlink.com/content/a88l166702524r55/fulltext.pdf?page=1https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225634696_Time_Deposits_Dimensions_and_Fraud?ev=prf_pubhttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-008-9976-9

11. Portillo, Javier and Walter E. Block. 2012. “Anti-Discrimination Laws: Undermining Our Rights,” Journal of Business Ethics; Vol. 109, No. 2, pp. 209-217; http://www.springer.com/home?SGWID=0-0-1003-0-0&aqId=2105739&download=1&checkval=0e046f4dd92abbdf3a08f3e26c9c7598http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-011-1120-6

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-011-1120-6

12. Smith, Taylor and Walter E. Block. 2015. “The Economics of Insider Trading and Labor: A Free Market Perspective” Journal of Business Ethics; March; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-015-2621-5?sa_campaign=email/event/articleAuthor/onlineFirsthttp://download.springer.com/static/pdf/937/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10551-015-2621-5.pdf?auth66=1427728764_9d09a26ff8fb21799943c9df3c097495&ext=.pdf; DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2621-5; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-015-2621-5

13. Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2015. “Maturity Mismatching and ‘Market Failure’” Journal of Business Ethics; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-015-2706-1; DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2706-1; http://www.springer.com/home?SGWID=0-0-1003-0-0&aqId=2857155&download=1&checkval=bcf7a55607153e6921342e885ac6bb8fhttp://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-015-2706-1

Other pubs in biz ethics:

Block, Walter E. and Robert W. McGee. 1992. “Insider Trading,” Business Ethics and Common Sense, Robert W. McGee, ed., New York: Quorum Books, pp. 219-229.

Block, Walter E. and Paul Cwik. 2007. “Teaching Business Ethics: A Classificationist Approach,” Business Ethics: A European Review.  Vol. 16, No. 2 April, pp. 98-107; http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/beer/16/2

Block, Walter E. Stephan Kinsella and Hans-Hermann Hoppe. 2000. “The Second Paradox of Blackmail,” Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 3, July, pp. 593-622; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/second_paradox.pdfhttp://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=149&hid=116&sid=781cb0b0-a517-47c5-9874-ee43ba5138d5%40sessionmgr3

Best regards,

Walter

Share

4:11 am on January 10, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

From: Darien Sumner

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 11:37 PM

To: wblock@loyno.edu

Subject: re: Child Prostitution

Well, that’s the most awkward e-mail subject I’ve ever typed.

As regards your correspondence with Ed on the subject of child prostitution, I believe the matter can be cleared up a bit if one considers the nature of the parent-child relationship. This is a topic I dove into some years back on the topic of spanking ( http://www.bumblingbees.net/articles/should-libertarians-spank-their-children

— also your fault, Dr. Block!), and I think the same logic applies here.

Parentage, in my view, is a trust. Must as the manager of a trust fund has an obligation to deliver the fund in good condition when the heir is of age to inherit, the parents have the obligation to deliver the object of their trust — namely, the child himself — in good condition once the heir is of age. If we hold that prostitution is inherently harmful to a child, then there is no difficulty in seeing how parents who allow their children to become prostitutes are in grave violation of their stewardship obligations.

If a trustee of a monetary trust is found to have managed the money wrongfully — the classic example is of the trustee who gambles it away, planning to replace the missing money with “winnings” that never come — then he is certainly a criminal (note that this is different from the trustee who merely manages the money *badly*). Why would not parents who manage their child wrongfully (again, as distinct from merely badly) also be criminals? In both cases, the wrongful behavior of the trustee has damaged the object of the trust; indeed, one could comfortably argue that the parents are far worse criminals than the money manager, since surely causing the child himself to be sexually exploited is a graver crime than the theft of some money.

Anyhow, I hope my meanderings have been of some value to you. Thank you again for everything you do — especially for exposing such interesting questions for us to think about!

— D

Dear Darien:

You make excellent sense.

Here are my pubs on spanking:

December 9, 2013. Debate: Walter Block and Stefan Molyneux, Freedomain Radio on spanking children. Michael DeMarco; operations@freedomainradio.com; skype: michaelmdemarco; 716-533-2171; Video: http://youtu.be/EgCmoVbdYtE;

MP3: http://cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/FDR_2552_Walter_Block_Debate.mp3http://libertariannerds.com/2016/11/19/wizardly-wisdom-reality-anxiety-ep-4-darien-sumner-from-bumblingbees-net/

Block, Walter E. 2016. Starving Child, Part III: Spanking Children; November 5; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/starving-child-part-iii-spanking-children/

Mosquito, Bionic. 2016. “Walter Hits One Out of the Park.” November 5; http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2016/11/walter-hits-one-out-of-park.html

July 16, 2017. Vancouver, BC, Canada. Walter Block debates Tim Moen, Leader of the Canadian Libertarian Party. https://www.facebook.com/events/1800169280300222/

436 W Pender Street, downtown Vancouver at 2:30pm.  Topic: Is spanking children compatible with libertarianism? Contact: Victor Pross: artpross@hotmail.com; or go here:

https://www.facebook.com/events/1800169280300222/1831218550528628/?acontext=%7B%22ref%22%3A%2229%22%2C%22ref_notif_type%22%3A%22admin_plan_mall_activity%22%2C%22action_history%22%3A%22null%22%7D&notif_t=admin_plan_mall_activity&notif_id=1498028247599964. Open to the public. https://youtu.be/J6Kto38tk1I

July 21, 2013. Interview with Steve Patterson, FEE http://libertariannerds.com/2016/11/19/wizardly-wisdom-reality-anxiety-ep-4-darien-sumner-

from-bumblingbees-net/

Best regards,

Walter

Share

4:09 am on January 10, 2021

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Letter 1

From: Sergey Fedorov

Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 10:39 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: question about infamous utility

Greetings, dear Professor Block!

I have a brief question about the “utility” and its aggregation and comparison.

(Please do not take it as an effort to justify Neoclassical models, my question is exclusively on methodology.)

Do we refuse to accept any substance behind the concept of “utility” on praxeological or empirical grounds? That is, would you say it is impossible by definition or impossible due to actual limitations and imperfections of our knowledge?

It seems to me that an objective measure of “subjective safisfaction” might make sense at least when taken to stand for “pleasure”, even if current technology does not allow it practically.

Certain regions of brain cortex activate and certain hormones and neurotransmitters change when a given emotion is experienced. (I am not an expert on brain biochemistry, but I think my statement is sufficiently accurate.) If so, it should be possible to measure these, which would allow us to introduce a common denominator, be it a number of activated neurons, level of hormone in blood or what not.

What do you think?

P. S. I do understand that it is a very narrowly defined “utility” (someone can see a value in a thing that is not pleasurable – on ethical grounds etc.).

Letter 2

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 00:20, Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu> wrote:

Dear Sergey:

I don’t at all think that utility and praxeology are incompatible. For Austrians, ordinal utility is a legitimate concept. We only oppose cardinal utility, indifference curves, etc.

Right now, we can measure body temperature. Normal is 98.6 degrees. But what the thermometer measures is speed of molecules running around, if I understand this correctly. It is not the SAME as temperature. Heat and speed are different.

One day, perhaps, we’ll come up with a similar “meaure” of happiness.” Maybe, it will be something like speed of electrons running through the brain. Does this mean that on that day cardinal utility will be licit? The interpersonal comparisons of utility will be possible? I think not. For happiness and speed of electons, similarly, will not be the SAME.

The best thing ever written on this sort of thing is this:

Rothbard. Murray N. 1997 [1956]. “Toward a Reconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics.” reprinted in “The Logic of Action” Vol. I. Lyme, NH: Edward Elgar. pp. 211-254; http://www.mises.org/rothbard/toward.pdf

Also see this very important contribution:

Gordon, David. 1993. “Toward a Deconstruction of Utility and Welfare Economics,” The Review of Austrian Economics, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 99-112; http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/RAE6_2_4.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

Letter 3

From: Sergey Fedorov

Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2020 1:55 PM

To: Walter Block <wblock@loyno.edu>

Subject: Re: question about infamous utility

Thank you very much for your reply!

You are right, I should have specified that I ask about “cardinal utility”. Obviously ordinal is totally okay.

As for your example about the temperature, regardless of the particular mechanism of measurement from the point of physics, can’t we in a meaningful sense compare temperatures of different objects and measure degrees of difference and not only more hot/more cold?

At the same time, upon an afterthought I am not sure purely biochemical measurements will accurately correspond to psychic experiences, since “default” level of neurotransmitters varies and perhaps magnitude of changes too. So perhaps you are right, it still won’t make cardinal utility legit.

Sincerely,

Sergey Fedorov

Letter 4

Dear Sergey:

Temperature measures the speed of molecules, somewhere in the body, I think. My temperature is 97.8. Yours in 98.6. Your temperature is higher than mine. No problem.

Now we get a “utility meter.” It also measures the speed of molecules, let’s posit, in the brain somewhere. You score a 50, I score a 25. Does this mean you are twice as happy as I am? Does this mean, even, that you have more utility than me? But, suppose I laugh a lot, tell jokes, and you are morose, depressed. What are we going to believe? The score on the “utility meter” or our lying eyes. Now invert the scores. You score a 25, I score a 50. Now, it is more believable that I am happier than you, even if not twice as happy. But why? Due to the score on the machine, or to our outward behavior. I think the latter

An analogy comes to mind. Indifference is a perfectly good English word. We all know what it means, even Austrian economists. But as a matter of technical economics, human action consists of preference; we can’t demonstrate indifference when we choose.

This “utility” meter might be like indifference is, for ordinary language. But for technical economics, I think it would be impossible for it to function.

Similarly, in physics, “work” is a function of mass and distance. Yet, if you hold 20 pound bar bells extended with elbows straight, you’ll be sweating, “working” but only in ordinary language, not in technical physics.

Best regards,

Walter

Share

7:03 am on December 28, 2020

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }
RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Google+
http://walterblock.com/
Twitter