Recent comments

That Joe became a government of one hits close to the mark. To say that government is not the root of evil, but the individuals who compose it, is a mistake. Considering government to be a separate entity to those individuals of whom it consists is a collectivist notion. Only actions can be evil and only individuals act. This does not change the fact that government is the locus of evil action.

"Mathematics of Rule" proves who will win and why. The irony is, this is a re-run of a war that was already won, whose result forms the very basis of former western civilization (the rules by which we cooperate for MUTUAL self-interest): http://www.nazisociopaths.org/modules/article/view.article.php/c1/32

This column is accurate, and the key question, pertinent: "When will [people] realize that they DON’T need any leaders AT ALL?" However isn't it better to demolish idiots by showing the falsehoods in what they say or do, and if possible by questioning their premises, rather than by accusing them of having squeaky voices or stumpy legs? Glenn Beck still isn't thinking outside the box, but he does broadcast some true stuff and it seems inappropriate to belittle him without even having heard what he says. I believe the name for that style is "ad hominem." Put it this way: suppose a Tea Partygoer happens upon this article. He is angry about the increase in government under Obama, and eager to find out what's up. He likes Sarah and Glenn. Will this article motivate him to read more in STR and discover why nobody needs any leaders at all?

Just imagine if every thing a person does is illegal.Do you think he would be able to survive without fear and doubt?I don't think so! Like for example,a person who escape in paying taxes.Of course there is a corresponding penalty for that.Among the big things which governs income tax rates and tax theory in general in these United States is something called the Laffer Curve - which makes sense since it is a real laugher. It was made popular by Jude Wanniski, a crony of Donald Rumsfield, Dick Cheney, and later, Reagan and Bush, and the debate goes that there's a midpoint of taxation rates which makes for optimal collection and use of tax funding, which is intended to be basically payday cash advances from the individuals to the government. It's distinctly tied to Keynesian economics, and the Austrians (free market, libertarian types - not Reagan, btw) dispute its efficacy.

It is great to have another essay from B.R. I think he's onto something here when he speaks about truth as a condition needed in the pursuit of freedom. Stack most certainly concluded with an untenable position when he initiated the violence. To sort of paraphrase Stefan Molyneux, the moral justifications for taking such actions become more and more convoluted the further we move away from truth. I think that the main truth that Stack willfully ignored was that the initiation of force is never morally justified. In my view, "winning" freedom will mean that one day we can persuade enough individuals not only to hear the counter argument against government, but also to hold to intellectual and moral honesty by knowing the simple truth that the initiation of force is immoral. If we can be honest in looking for the truth, I think the "diffusion and confusion" that tzo wrote about (here on STR, 4/04) is greatly diminished.

This stinker of an article is as shallow and trite as I've read in months. Maybe if we're lucky, Roger Young will "Just Go Away".

I agree that Greece right now is suffering from a great economic tragedy that it was worsen to a BBB downgrade remark. It seems credit rating is vital to governments also, as Fitch has downgraded the credit rating of Greece to one of the lowest possible levels, BBB minus, with the rest of the European willing to help, but not too generously. (That proves the point about IGOs serving the interests of probably the most powerful member states.) Greece has been home to crisis after crisis, first liberation from Turkey, military and communist dictatorships, and now it needs payday loans from abroad to prop up its troubled economy. It's unpleasant to see the birthplace of Western Civilization struggle when its progeny disregards it.

The economy can grow without the supply of the medium of exchange increasing. What happens is that each unit of the medium of exchange will become more valuable with respect to other goods as there are more goods available. This means that prices of those goods will generally decrease (price deflation), which is what we want. This is what makes it possible for those on the low end of the economic spectrum to enjoy a higher standard of living. It makes their money go further by allowing them to buy more. Also, when the medium of exchange tends to rise in value over time, saving instead of spending is made possible. In a system where the supply of the medium of exchange is increased, the value of that medium tends to decrease over time with respect to other goods. Thus you get higher prices (again, price inflation that results from inflation of the supply of money). In this environment, saving means you lose value over time and thus the incentive it to spend the money now before it loses value. It also tends to make people take more risks with investing in their attempts to get a return on their money that outpaces the rate of inflation. In a stable monetary system, saving by stuffing your mattress is relatively safe. Barring theft or accidental destruction, it will increase in value or at worst hold steady. In an inflationary monetary system, stuffing your mattress is a losing proposition and we have seen that investing in stocks and other financials is anything BUT safe in recent years. The supply of gold does increase every year. However, the new supply is quite small relative to the total existing supply and thus the increase is very small and tends not to experience sudden increases. Even many of the "big" gold rushes only had an effect in the area immediately around the sources of the gold. As you get out away from the source, the inflationary impact on prices lessens. However, if a large enough new supply were found and rapidly injected into the market, it would cause prices to react accordingly and they would likely go up, at least for a time.

< / State >

Wikileaks is a great organization and they've published all sorts of great material from whistle-blowers who have evidence of embarassing illegal activities especially of the govt or the companies they collude with. Naturally the USG wants to shut them down.

Fixed in article. Thanks.

I will not comply. I have five years left until I am eligible for our socialist medical care system. Until then, I will not now down to Mammon.

Actually, no. I have never used a cell phone, never will. I have a perfectly good telephone at home and at work, plugged into the wall where it can't get away. When I walk, I don't need a phone; don't want the distraction of its incessant ringing. Can't think with people yammering at me all the time. Technology should be held at arms length at all times, else it take control.

My respect for Robert Higgs increased--it was already very high--as I listened to this interview. I've been guilty of economic apocalypticism myself. While not papering over how bad things are and could become, Higgs brings a good measure of perspective, and humility, to his analysis of the current state of the economy. This is definitely worth a listen.

Nice article! For the interested reader, Murray Rothbard has several great writings about money. The following are listed in order of how long they are, shortest to longest. All of them are really good. The last one is his great treatise on economics in general and absolutely rocks! The Case for a 100 Percent Gold Dollar http://mises.org/daily/1829 What Has Government Done to Our Money? http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf The Case Against the Fed http://mises.org/books/fed.pdf The Mystery of Banking http://mises.org/mysteryofbanking/mysteryofbanking.pdf History of Money and Banking in the United States: The Colonial Era to World War II http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf Man, Economy, and State, with Power and Market http://mises.org/rothbard/mes.asp

This is a difficult thesis for me, because a good system of roads, for example, serves a defensive function that is even more fundamental than its economic function. The interstate system in America was conceived with internal military transportation in mind. The speed with which warfare is conducted in modern times would seem to demand that a good system of roads be built before it is needed, and in order to do that a government must have the means to demand the sale of land. I think the analysis in this article overlooks a distinction in the development -- one might more appropriately say devolution -- of the concept of "public good." I am only hypothesizing such a devolution; but the same sort of deterioration took place in the field of law in the 20th century. Briefly, courts began supporting abrogation of contracts when such resulted in more efficient use of resources, the idea being that a more efficient use of resources benefited everyone. This approach subordinates the value of integrity, of keeping one's word, to economics, which should be deplorable to anyone of principle. So, I am wondering if a similar corruption has occurred with the notion of "public good." Perhaps "public good" was more narrowly defined in bygone days so as to include certain presupposed limitations based on intangible values that have waned or disappeared altogether from modern consciousness. If I were to hazard a guess, I'd suggest that this loss may be due in no small part to the depersonalized view of man himself as a mere member of this group or that class rather than as an individual, glorious in his own right. Maybe when man's existence as a noble creature was a given, no one would have dreamed of interpreting "public good" in merely economic terms so as to take from one individual and give to another. In other words, maybe the problems isn't that eminent domain is wrong, but rather that those applying the principle are corrupt and so apply it in a corrupt fashion. I don't see how eminent domain can be avoided in the modern era. The trick is that it has to be applied by men of good character, and these have become hard to find.

Thank you for this well-written, thoughtful and educational article. The moral dilemma referred to in a few of the comments is unnecessary. Backing down and complying needn't be about a lack of courage; it can be about picking your battles, viewing your opportunity to resist as a resource and spending it where it will be most effective. Only you know which concern is paramount to you. I will comply with an oppressor's dictates if by so doing I remain at liberty to cause all sorts of other kinds of trouble. Take the long view. Bow and scrape, and then corrupt your neighbors when the oppressor has turned his attention elsewhere. :) The non-violent non-cooperators are the only real threat by the oppressed to an oppressive regime; and don't think that some of them don't know it. Let's get busy and cause as much trouble as we can, while we can! There's a vast populace out there, ignorant of their power; and we must educate them.

The sad part is that legions of Keynesians will see this as a great move. Just watch CNBC for proof. I've been really disappointed that there aren't more people in congress like Dr. Paul, or who at least get it. And when the defecation hits the ventilation, everyone will look surprised, and start pointing fingers. Of course no one could have seen this coming..... ;-) Regards

Ahoy mateys! She have a swashbuckling new captain, but the U.S.S. American Corporatocracy be running true to her same ol' course.

"Why Does the World Feel Wrong?" is one of the most powerful and important essays I've ever read. It's terrifying and edifying in equal measure. The State -- a psychopathic organization (because it is based on coercion, i.e., on criminal action) attracts and empowers psychopaths. With the State in power over every square inch of inhabitable land on this planet, Groves' observation that "the world feels wrong because psychopaths run it" is deeply, horribly true. Andrew Lobaczewski, who Groves' discusses here, has said "The only conspiracy that matters is the conspiracy of the psychopaths against the rest of us." I can't think of a better way to put it. How can we reduce the number of psychopaths in the world? By more compassionate and respectful treatment of pregnant mothers, newborns, infants, and children. How can we reduce the power of psychopaths to harm the rest of us? By reducing, and eventually eliminating, the coercion at the heart of State structures. Love and freedom, together, are the answer. Neither will work alone.

While this article makes sense, as far as it goes, there is a problem with it: What happens, after a lifetime of putting up with abuse? When you are on your deathbed, are you going to say to yourself, "I wish I had resisted, at least once?" You cannot become more free by complying with every statist whim. The problem with being "the one who can take the abuse and remain standing" is that, after a while, you are no longer standing. You are on your knees. The problem also is this notion that every sign of resistance will be rewarded with a beat-down. It just ain't so. There are many, many cases where pushback had no adverse consequences whatever; other cases where the gain in self-respect was worth the pain. When one's personal situation calls for survival (e.g., when supporting a family), then survive. When that no longer holds, then at least on some occasions, don't put up with crap. And on the off chance that that results with the end of your life, then take as many of the bastards with you as you can. Eventually, if enough people do this, they will run out of bastards.

Disappointing. Didn't much get into 'why he matters'.

For myself, they went far enough when they agreed to participate, the rest was obvious.

Muse's album "The Resistance" is a modern example of this.