≡ Menu

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/walter-blocks-talk-on-abortion-at-the-libertarian-scholars-conference-nashville-tennessee/

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/walter-block-interview-on-jewish-gentile-relations-misunderstandings/

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

Lecture on Privatizing Oceans, Rivers, Lakes

On October 13, 2022 I gave a lecture to The 10th Annual World Congress of the Ocean in Japan.

See it here (it starts at 4 minutes and 15 seconds):

https://loyno.zoom.us/rec/share/h3ZhIhAOFM5o_srkLAwtLYctIOY8kwxmksSVPV44FcJT7m4E0CQjx2B7kZGjw7oC.6domIjSGAUvGxxc3

Passcode:  !xTN8qG%

Walter E. Block, Ph.D.

Share

2:22 am on November 16, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/behold-my-newly-published-intro-econ-textbook/

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/what-is-the-libertarian-perspective-on-privacy/

From: David

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Privacy in the digital era

Walter,

Can you share any writings you — or others you recommend — have done on the “right” to privacy from a libertarian perspective?

The privacy policy analyst I work with at the Libertas Institute (Utah’s libertarian think-tank) is forming a scholar’s network around the question of privacy from the government — especially in the digital age.

Hope all is well!

Best,

David

Dear David:

Here you go:

Block, 1991, 2012, 2013A, 2013B, ch. 18, 2016; Block, Kinsella and Whitehead, 2006

Block, Walter E. 2016. “So-called Privacy Rights Are Incompatible with our Libertarian Philosophy.” September 23

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/called-privacy-rights-incompatible-libertarian-philosophy/

Block, Walter E. 1991. “Old Letters and Old Buildings,” The Freeman Ideas on Liberty, March, pp. 96, http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/old-letters-and-old-buildings/#axzz2Txojgrts;

https://fee.org/articles/old-letters-and-old-buildings-2/

Block, Walter E. 2012. “Rozeff on Privacy: A Defense of Rothbard.” December 13; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/rozeff-on-privacy-a-defense-of-rothbard/

Block, Walter E. 2013A. “There Is No Right to Privacy.” July 13;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/walter-e-block/there-is-no-right-to-privacy/

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/walter-block/there-is-no-right-to-privacy/

http://www.infowars.com/there-is-no-right-to-privacy/

http://libertycrier.com/walter-block-there-is-no-right-to-privacy/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LibertyCrier+%28Liberty+Crier%29

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/07/what-if-trayvon-martin-had-been.html;

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2013/07/on-my-ignorance-and-hypocricy.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+economicpolicyjournal%2FKpwH+%28EconomicPolicyJournal.com%29;

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=7e6cc2f6072b7ebfaa847047f&id=bd7ca29173&e=cb339c58dfhttp://libertycrier.com/walter-block-there-is-no-right-to-privacy/

Block, Walter E. 2013B. Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in all realms; Terra Libertas Publishing House

Block, Walter, Stephan Kinsella and Roy Whitehead. 2006. “The duty to defend advertising injuries caused by junk faxes: an analysis of privacy, spam, detection and blackmail.” Whittier Law Review, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 925-949; http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/block-etal_spam_whittier-2006.pdfhttp://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/faxesduty.pdf

Chapter on the “peeping tom”:

Block, Walter E. 2013. Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in all realms; Terra Libertas Publishing House; http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379098357&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+in+all+realmshttp://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380679730&sr=1-2; isbn: 9781908089373; http://terralibertas.com/products/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcoverhttp://archive.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/robert-wenzel/top-book-picks-of-2013/http://www.amazon.co.uk/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387741833&sr=1-1&keywords=Defending+the+Undefendable+II%3A+Freedom+in+All+Realmshttp://www.librarialibertas.com/economie/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcover.htmlhttp://mises.org/daily/6624/Walter-Block-Is-Still-Defending-the-Undefendablehttp://archive.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/mark-thornton/still-defending-the-undefendable/http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae17_1_6.pdf

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/1908089377

September 20, 2013. Guillermo Jimenez, [email protected]; Skype: tracesofreality; RBN Producer; 800-313-9443; the philosophy of libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, stateless order, bitcoin, rights to privacy; http://tracesofreality.com/2013/09/20/tor-radio-09202013-walter-block-on-the-fed-qe-infinity-bitcoin-and-anarchy/

Best regards,

Walter

Share

3:19 pm on October 6, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/nice-letter-about-defending-the-undefendable/

To: [email protected]

Subject: question.

Dear Professor Block,

I hope this note finds you doing well with the start of another semester. I wanted to write you and let you know that I have appreciated reading your work over the years. Defending the Undefendable is one of my favorite books that I have ever read! I will keep this brief as you must be busy. Is it possible to send you my copy to be signed by you? I would include a postage paid envelope. If so, is there a certain address I should send it to? Thank you for your time.

Warm regards,

Adrian

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: question.

Dear Adrian:

Sure. Send it. I’ll return it, signed. May I ask, where do you live, how old are you?

Since you liked Defending I so much, you might also like the two follow up volumes, with a completely new cast of characters:

Block, Walter E. 2013. Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in all realms; Mises Institute, Auburn AL; Terra Libertas Publishing House; isbn: 978-1-908089-37-3; http://store.mises.org/Defending-the-Undefendable-2-P10932.aspxhttp://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379098357&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+in+all+realmshttp://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380679730&sr=1-2; isbn: 9781908089373; http://terralibertas.com/products/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcoverhttp://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/robert-wenzel/top-book-picks-of-2013/http://www.amazon.co.uk/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387741833&sr=1-1&keywords=Defending+the+Undefendable+II%3A+Freedom+in+All+Realmshttp://www.librarialibertas.com/economie/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcover.htmlhttp://mises.org/daily/6624/Walter-Block-Is-Still-Defending-the-Undefendablehttp://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/mark-thornton/still-defending-the-undefendable/http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae17_1_6.pdf;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/1908089377; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/6I1PKZ08/defending-II-paperback.pdf;

file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/MP32C5LH/DTUIIFreedomInAllRealmMS20111107.pdf

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-%E2%80%94-audiobook;

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable;

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-2-0;

Spanish translation: https://www.editorialinnisfree.com/product-page/defendiendo-lo-indefendible-ii-walter-block

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-2-audiobook

Soundcloud here: https://soundcloud.com/misesmedia/sets/defending-the-undefendable-ii

and ApplePodcast here https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/defending-the-undefendable-ii/id1555138708

Block, Walter E. 2021.  Defending the Undefendable III. Springer Publishing Company; https://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-III-Walter-Block/dp/9811639566/ref=sr_1_24?dchild=1&keywords=libertarianism&qid=1623439836&s=books&sr=1-24https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9; ISBN: 978-981-16-3957-9; for book reviewers: https://www.springer.com/gp/reviewers

To purchase: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9;

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Defending-the-Undefendable-III-by-Walter-E-Block/9789811639562?utm_source=service_email&utm_campaign=order_confirm&utm_medium=email&utm_content=books;

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Defending-the-Undefendable-III-by-Walter-E-Block/9789811639562;

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Springer.com%20%7C%20US%20%7C%20Microsoft%20%7C%20Research%20%7C%20CPM%20%7C%20Shopping&utm_term=4584070140123873&utm_content=All%20eBookshttps://www.springer.com/gp/instructors/textbook-copy-request-us/17556774;

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9; ISBN: 978-981-16-3956-2

This book uniquely deals with hard cases of libertarianism. Beneficial specifically to readers interested in law, economics, politics and philosophy. Covers a wide range of examples of socio-cultural and economic various backgrounds

Best regards,

Walter

Share

3:18 pm on October 6, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/long-discussion-with-a-brilliant-high-school-student/

(Read from the bottom up; I thought he was a professor!)

Dear Amos:

I feel a compulsion to convert the heathen. I’ve already published on most of these issues, so here goes:

1. Abortion is murder and never justified:

30. Block, Walter E. 2021. Evictionism: The compromise solution to the pro-life pro-choice debate controversy. Springer Publishing Company.

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-5014-7;

For reviewers: https://www.springer.com/gp/reviewershttps://www.springer.com/gp/instructors/textbook-copy-request-us/17556774;

https://smc-link.s4hana.ondemand.com/eu/data-buffer/sap/public/cuan/link/100/C2AA39A530336AC2B82AE9F4BCD463ABDE73A280/pixel.gif?_L54AD1F204_=c2NlbmFyaW89TUxPUEVOJnRlbmFudD1teTMwNDQyNC5zNGhhbmEub25kZW1hbmQuY29t;

https://dam.springernature.com/preview/8qkJz6AE4NVAo0r_q1x9IT/previews/maxWidth_600.png?&authcred=YXBpX2V4dGVybjpndWVzdA;

<https://smc-link.s4hana.ondemand.com/eu/data-buffer/sap/public/cuan/link/100/C2AA39A530336AC2B82AE9F4BCD463ABDE73A280?_V_=2&_K11_=479FAFAD58110FE1BC920C170EC676450FAD8B67&_L54AD1F204_=c2NlbmFyaW89TUxDUEcmdGVuYW50PW15MzA0NDI0LnM0aGFuYS5vbmRlbWFuZC5jb20mdGFyZ2V0PWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3ByaW5nZXIuY29tP3NhcC1vdXRib3VuZC1pZD1DMkFBMzlBNTMwMzM2QUMyQjgyQUU5RjRCQ0Q0NjNBQkRFNzNBMjgw&_K13_=251&_K14_=8f04f66beb2626ad9394eacc16811b448131ace07eb93e987cff8b495fe74f45>;

https://dam.springernature.com/preview/8qkJz6AE4NVAo0r_q1x9IT/previews/maxWidth_600.png?&authcred=YXBpX2V4dGVybjpndWVzdA; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/HK3CWM0N/Block%20Evictionism%20The%20compromise%20solution%20to%20the%20pro-life%20pro-choice%20debate%20controversy%20(Walter%20E.%20Block)%20(z-lib.org).pdf; https://b-ok.cc/book/18608872/f7d2ac;

A unique perspective to the pro-life, pro-choice debate. Explores themes of property rights in relation to human life and rights. Offers a balanced debate on the topic of human rights.

Evicitionism- The compromise solution to the pro-life pro-choice debate controversy__.pdf

file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/0AGF02JT/__Evicitionism-%20The%20compromise%20solution%20to%20the%20pro-life%20pro-choice%20debate%20controversy__.pdf

2.Private eduction funding should be as high as people agree upon. Public education funding should be zero.

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Mandatory Student Fees: Forcing Some to Pay for the Free Speech of Others,” Whittier Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 759-781; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mfearningdifferentials.htmhttp://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mandatoryfees.htm

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2000. “Direct Payment of State Scholarship Funds to Church-Related Colleges Offends the Constitution and Title VI,” Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 191-207; http://tinyurl.com/2dwelfhttp://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/directpymt.htm;

http://www.academia.edu/1466695/Direct_Payment_of_State_Scholarship_Funds_to_Church-Related_Colleges_Offends_the_Constitution_and_Title_VI;

Young, Andrew and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Enterprising Education: Doing Away with the Public School System,” International Journal of Value Based Management, Vol.12, No. 3, pp. 195-207; http://www.mises.org/etexts/enterprisingedu.pdfhttp://www.mises.org/story/2216http://www.walterblock.com/publications/enterprising_education.pdfhttp://www.mises.org/story/2216https://mises.org/library/enterprising-education-doing-away-public-school-system?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=b769abd2e7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-b769abd2e7-227976965

3.Pollution. Here’s the best thing ever written on that subject:

Rothbard, Murray N. 1982. “Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution,” Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring; reprinted in Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, Walter E. Block, ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1990, pp. 233-279. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/lawproperty.pdfhttp://mises.org/story/2120

Here are some other good readings:

Block, 1994, 1998, 2009, 2011, 2012; DiLorenzo, 1990; Gordon, 2021; Horwitz, 1977; Lewin, 1982; McGee and Block, 1994; Rockwell, 2000; Rothbard, 1982

Block, Walter E. 1994. “Pollution,” Cliches of Politics, Mark Spengler, ed., Irvington on Hudson, New York: Foundation for Economic Education, pp. 267-270

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

Block, Walter E. 2009. “Contra Watermelons.” Ethics, Place & Environment, Vol. 12, Issue 3, October, pp. 305 – 308; http://mises.org/daily/4209http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a916452684&fulltext=713240928

Block, Walter E. 2011. “Ron Paul and the Environment.” December 13;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block189.html

Block, Walter E. 2012. “Global Warming, Air Pollution and Libertarianism.” January 18;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block195.html

DiLorenzo, Thomas. 1990. “Does Capitalism Cause Pollution?,” St. Louis, Washington University: Center for the Study of American Business, Contemporary Issues Series 38.

Gordon, David. 2021. “Can Taxation Be Justified?” August 13;

https://mises.org/library/can-taxation-be-justified

Horwitz, Morton J. 1977. The Transformation of American Law: 1780-1860, Cambridge: Harvard University Press

Lewin, Peter.  1982. “Pollution Externalities: Social Cost and Strict Liability.”  Cato Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, Spring, pp. 205-229.

McGee, Robert W. and Walter E. Block. 1994. “Pollution Trading Permits as a Form of Market Socialism and the Search for a Real Market Solution to Environmental Pollution,” Fordham University Law and Environmental Journal, Vol. VI, No. 1, Fall, pp. 51-77; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/pollution_trading_permits.pdf. Translated into Russian, and published in № 3б, 2007 of “Ekonomicheskaya Politika” (Economic Policy) Journal; http://tinyurl.com/263787http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Fwd:.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_m%D1%81gee-block.pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/m%D1%81gee-block.pdf?attach=1http://www.walterblock.com/translations.php;

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1374&context=elr

Rockwell, Jr. Llewellyn. 2000.  “The Enviro-Skeptic’s Manifesto.” May 1;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/anti-enviro.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 1982. “Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution,” Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring; reprinted in Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, Walter E. Block, ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1990, pp. 233-279. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/lawproperty.pdfhttp://mises.org/story/2120

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;

4. Statues:

I want to have statues of Hitler and Stalin on my private property (to throw eggs at, or, to pray to). What justification do you offer to compel me to take down these statues? Or to do so over my objections?

There shouldn’t be any statues on govt streets or highways since they should all be privatized:

Block, Walter E. 2009. The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors; Auburn, AL: The Mises Institute; https://store.mises.org/Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Human-and-Economic-Factors-The-P581.aspxhttp://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Roads-And-Highways-Factors/dp/1279887303/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336605800&sr=1-1; available for free here: http://mises.org/books/roads_web.pdfhttp://mises.org/daily/3416http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/radical_privatization.pdf; audio: http://store.mises.org/Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Audiobook-P11005.aspxhttp://www.audible.com/pd/Business/The-Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Audiobook/B0167IT18K?tag=misesinsti-20http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=bf16b152ccc444bdbbcc229e4&id=6cbc90577b&e=54244ea97d;

http://www.sanfranciscoreviewofbooks.com/2017/09/book-review-privatization-of-roads-and.html

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

You can kidnap me, but I don’t think my head would look good in a blanket. Find something else.

My mistaken political views: I guess they’re a bit of a mix-up. I’m mainly focused on philosophy of religion, but when I think about politics I try to take it issue by issue. Maybe when I’m old enough to be a boomer I’ll look back and try to sort them into an ideological grouping. I don’t have many political views, but here are some things I do believe:

(1)      I’m agnostic about whether abortion is homicide, but I would ban it out of moral risk. This is caveated by the standard exemption (life of the mother), but also by the abortion method: abortions done by way of blocking implantation should not be banned, even if the foetus is a person with a right to life. (I explain why in a paper I wrote, but that’s currently under review).

(2)      Higher education funding should be cut to the barest minimum. (Possibly even less). This is quite libertarian of me.

(3)      Carbon should be taxed to mitigate climate change. Other government interventions might work, but I’m not sure what those are.

(4)      Statues of people who committed serious rights violations should be taken down. If the government refuses to take them down, it can be permissible for protestors to vandalise them.

I have other views, but they are largely unexamined and only tacitly held. (The other day I realised that I though MMT was a bad thing, even though I only barely know what it is and haven’t read anything by its defenders.)

No doubts you’ll have lots of thoughts about all of this. Resist the temptation to write a second dissertation in response. You need your sleep.

Best wishes,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Yes, we do have a similar sense of humor.

If someone throws a blanket over you head, kidnaps you and brings you to New Orleans, and compels you to enroll at Loyola, it’ll be me. I’ll be working on how I can reconcile this with libertarianism.

What are your present (e.g., mistaken) political views?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 5:12 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

I’m sure it will be. I’m not a libertarian at the moment – not even the wussy kind – but I’m open to being persuaded of a political philosophy, even *sighs deeply* yours. That said, I look forward to forcing you to renounce your entire life’s work.

Only joking of course,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Go easy on me, please! I’m an old man! My age is the inverse of your 18!

On a more serious note, it will be a pleasure to debate these issues with you, and convert you into a radical deontological libertarian, instead of your present wussy libertarianism!

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

Whew! Just finished reading. That was one helluva piece. Compliments gratefully received.

Don’t feel horrid – you have nothing to be sorry about. If you can’t handle the heat, get out of the kitchen. I think we have a pretty similar sense of humour; the chippiness is part of the fun.

I’ll try to get my response typed up and submitted as soon as I can.

Best wishes,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Whoa. Wow. You sure fooled me. May I ask how old are you?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Hi Walter:

Thanks. Yes, that should be fine 🙂

Not a professor anywhere! Just got out of secondary school, and will be a first year undergrad at Oxford in about a month.

Best,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Here’s an attachment, not a shareable link. I hope and trust that will suffice.

May I ask where are you a professor at?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: [email protected]

Subject: Conjoined twins

Hi Walter! Amos here. Just saw your response to my article on the Philosophia website. Unfortunately, I don’t have institutional access – would you mind sending me the shareable link?

Looking forward to reading,

Amos.

Share

3:17 pm on October 6, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

To: ‘David

Subject: RE: Hoppe and children

Dear David:

But poor people wouldn’t be allowed to have kids. For they could not post bonds to forfeit if their kids misbehaved. They could not reliably promise to make good for their kids future misdeeds. Isn’t that a good reductio?

Poor people, then, wouldn’t be able to invite foreigners, immigrants, onto their holdings.

Best regards,

Walter

From: David

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 7:08 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Hoppe and children

On Hoppe’s argument, you can still have children. You just have to be responsible for any costs they impose on others. When they grow up you can either continue to be responsible for them or send them out of the country, whichever you prefer.

On 7/24/22 3:21 PM, Walter Block wrote:

Dear David:

No, he has not replied to this argument, to the best of my knowledge. But he’s not the only one who is vulnerable to his reductio, of course.

However, not only does this apply to being responsible for the bad deeds of foreign invitees, or being respoinsible for children’s misdeeds, it also applies to having children in the first place. They are all “immigrants” from the country “storkovia.” If you think children come from pregnancy, you’re wrong. They come from the country storkovia, and are brought here by storks! So, if you oppose open immigration, you should, logically, oppose “open” births. The government should limit the number of kids that are born. Yay, China and it’s one child policy, in this view.

I wrote about this “stork” reductio here:

Block, Walter E. 2016B. “A response to the libertarian critics of open-borders libertarianism,” Lincoln Memorial University Law Review; Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 142-165; http://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/lmulrev/vol4/iss1/6/;

http://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1071&context=lmulrev

Block, Walter E. 2011A. “Hoppe, Kinsella and Rothbard II on Immigration: A Critique.” Journal of Libertarian Studies; Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 593–623; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_29.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

From: David

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 1:50 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Hoppe and children

I am adding to my chapter on immigration your point that Hoppe’s argument applies to newborn children of present residents as well as to immigrants. If he is consistent, he should propose that parents be responsible for any costs imposed by their adult children and, if they are not willing to be, the children should be exiled.

Has he ever responded to that argument?

David

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 2:22 PM

To: ‘David

Subject: RE: Hoppe and children

Dear David:

No, he has not replied to this argument, to the best of my knowledge. But he’s not the only one who is vulnerable to his reductio, of course.

However, not only does this apply to being responsible for the bad deeds of foreign invitees, or being respoinsible for children’s misdeeds, it also applies to having children in the first place. They are all “immigrants” from the country “storkovia.” If you think children come from pregnancy, you’re wrong. They come from the country storkovia, and are brought here by storks! So, if you oppose open immigration, you should, logically, oppose “open” births. The government should limit the number of kids that are born. Yay, China and it’s one child policy, in this view.

Best regards,

Walter

Share

3:14 pm on October 6, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }

On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 1:10 PM Flenser wrote:

Hi Walter,

I have a growing interest in Austrian economics and libertarianism, and because I believe you’re the world leader on these topics, I’d very appreciate it if you can help me with the following questions (actually I have lots of questions, but these are the most pressing ones I have at the moment):

1. If FRB is fraud, isn’t insurance in general a fraud? Just like banks, insurance companies cannot pay all of their clients in case all of them, or a large portion of them, lay a claim at the same time.

2. If banks were to add 1 simple clause in their contract with you: Your checking deposit is redeemable only if we have sufficient reserves to satisfy your claim – would then FRB be non-fraudulent? (and I claim that the current condition in real life is very similar to this, as almost everyone is aware of that proviso).

3. Regarding cardinal utility: If I’m willing to pay max 6 bucks for a hat and only max 3 bucks for a pen, why doesn’t it mean I value the hat twice as much as the pen? And hence I derive twice as many utils from it?

Also, it makes no sense to deny that life saving medicine doesn’t give a lot, lot more utility than, say, a can of coke. Even if it’s not accurately quantifiable, it seems hard to deny that cardinal utility is real.

4. Punishment in libertarian law – Rothbard has the “2 tooth” argument. But doesn’t it fail in cases where the criminal act has a very low chance of being detected? Say I steal 100$ from you and there’s only a 1 in a million chance I get caught – it’ll still pay me to keep robbing everyone if the max punishment is just “2 teeth” (200$ more or less?)

Thanks a lot and I wish you Chag Sameach,

Dan

Dear Dan:

See below for my responses.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Flenser

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Questions about Austrian economics

Hi Walter,

I have a growing interest in Austrian economics and libertarianism, and because I believe you’re the world leader on these topics, I’d very appreciate it if you can help me with the following questions (actually I have lots of questions, but these are the most pressing ones I have at the moment):

1. If FRB is fraud, isn’t insurance in general a fraud? Just like banks, insurance companies cannot pay all of their clients in case all of them, or a large portion of them, lay a claim at the same time.

<<< the frb banks have an instantaneous debt greater than their assets. This is not true for the insurance firms. They have no debt at all yet, since the calamity didn’t yet occur.

2. If banks were to add 1 simple clause in their contract with you: Your checking deposit is redeemable only if we have sufficient reserves to satisfy your claim – would then FRB be non-fraudulent? (and I claim that the current condition in real life is very similar to this, as almost everyone is aware of that proviso).

<<< yes, that would be fine. But this would turn the demand deposit into a frb time deposit, which no Rothbardian such as I looks upon as fraudulent

3. Regarding cardinal utility: If I’m willing to pay max 6 bucks for a hat and only max 3 bucks for a pen, why doesn’t it mean I value the hat twice as much as the pen? And hence I derive twice as many utils from it?

<<< there aint no such thing as a util, a unit of happiness. “I’m now happy at the rate of 7.6 utils” is a meaningless statement.

Also, it makes no sense to deny that life saving medicine doesn’t give a lot, lot more utility than, say, a can of coke. Even if it’s not accurately quantifiable, it seems hard to deny that cardinal utility is real.

<<< Austrians support ordinal, not cardinal, utility. I have no trouble saying “life saving medicine is preferrable to a can of coke.” That’s not meaningless

4. Punishment in libertarian law – Rothbard has the “2 tooth” argument. But doesn’t it fail in cases where the criminal act has a very low chance of being detected? Say I steal 100$ from you and there’s only a 1 in a million chance I get caught – it’ll still pay me to keep robbing everyone if the max punishment is just “2 teeth” (200$ more or less?)

<<< the libertarian view is 2 teeth for a tooth, plus costs of capture, plus a penalty for scaring. That is VERY draconian. See on this:

Block, 2009A, 2009B, 2016, 2018; Gordon, 2020; Kinsella, 1996, 1997; Loo and Block, 2017-2018; Olson, 1979; Rothbard, 1977, 1998; Whitehead and Block, 2003

Block, Walter E. 2009A. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf;

http://mises.org/books/property_freedom_society_kinsella.pdf; festschrift

Block, Walter E. 2009B. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/

Block, Walter E. 2016. “Russian Roulette: Rejoinder to Robins.” Acta Economica et Turistica. Vol. 1, No. 2, May, pp.  197-205; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309300488_Russian_Roulette_Rejoinder_to_Robins; file:///C:/Users/walterblock/Downloads/AET_2_Block_6.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2018. “The case for punishing those responsible for minimum wage laws, rent control and protectionist tariffs.”  Revista Jurídica Cesumar – Mestrado, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 235-263; http://periodicos.unicesumar.edu.br/index.php/revjuridica/article/view/6392http://periodicos.unicesumar.edu.br/index.php/revjuridica/article/view/6392/3190

Gordon, David. 2020. “Rothbard and Double Restitution.” September 4;

https://mises.org/wire/rothbard-and-double-restitution?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=ccce2acf8d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-ccce2acf8d-227976965

Loo, Andy and Walter E. Block. 2017-2018. “Threats against third parties: a libertarian analysis.” Baku State University Law Review; Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 52-64; http://lr.bsulawss.org/archive/volume4/issue1/http://lr.bsulawss.org/archive/volume4/issue1/block/http://lr.bsulawss.org/files/archive/volume4/issue1/4BSULawRev13.pdf?

Kinsella, Stephen. 1996. “Punishment and Proportionality: the Estoppel Approach,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring, pp. 51-74; http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/12_1/12_1_3.pdf

Kinsella, Stephan. 1997. “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” 30 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 607-45

Olson, Charles B. 1979. “Law in Anarchy.” Libertarian Forum. Vol. XII, No. 6, November-December, p. 4; http://64.233.167.104/u/Mises?q=cache:gFT18_ZusWoJ:www.mises.org/journals/lf/1979/1979_11-12.pdf+two+teeth+for+a+tooth&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Rothbard, Murray N. 1977. “Punishment and Proportionality.”  R. E. Barnett and J. Hagel, III (eds.), Assessing the Criminal: Restitution, Retribution, and the Legal Process.  Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co., pp. 259 270.

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. https://cdn.mises.org/The%20Ethics%20of%20Liberty%2020191108.pdf;

In the view of Rothbard (1998, p. 88, ft. 6): “It should be evident that our theory of proportional punishment—that people may be punished by losing their rights to the extent that they have invaded the rights of others—is frankly a retributive theory of punishment, a ‘tooth (or two teeth) for a tooth’ theory. Retribution is in bad repute among philosophers, who generally dismiss the concept quickly as ‘primitive’ or ‘barbaric’ and then race on to a discussion of the two other major theories of punishment: deterrence and rehabilitation. But simply to dismiss a concept as ‘barbaric’ can hardly suffice; after all, it is possible that in this case, the ‘barbarians’ hit on a concept that was superior to the more modern creeds.”

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2003. “Taking the assets of the criminal to compensate victims of violence: a legal and philosophical approach,” Wayne State University Law School Journal of Law in Society Vol. 5, No. 1, Fall, pp.229-254

Thanks a lot and I wish you Chag Sameach,

Dan

Share

3:12 pm on October 6, 2022

Please follow and like us:
{ 0 comments }
RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Google+
http://walterblock.com/
Twitter