David Brooks, in this provocative critique of Republican Libertarianism, uses the insights of Hayek without mentioning him...
As part of his continuing series Making Sense of financial news, Paul Solman has a unique look at the legacy of economist John Maynard Keynes, who first introduced the concept of government intervention in the economy, and his countertenor Friedrich Hayek. . . .
More resources including lyrics and a free download of the song are here. . . .
Hoover fellow Russell Roberts is using rap music to make the dismal science far less dismal. By Charles Lindsey.
Why Here, Why Now? Why Did The United States Enjoy Dramatic Improvements In The Standard Of Living During The Last Century?
Hoover Institution economists John Cogan, Lee Ohanian, Terry Anderson, and George Shultz examine the causes for and the reasons behind so many improvements being made to the quality of life in the United States over the past century. They analyze the role that free markets, property rights, innovation, regulation, taxes, and national security played in these remarkable achievements.
Why Hanoi was not a failure; and whether the focus of the US-China trade deal should be on the theft of American inventions instead of tariffs and trade deficits.
Classical liberals and libertarians, especially those who admire the works of the famous legal theorists and economist F.A. Hayek, are fond of pointing out that a free society requires the rule of law...
In America we have what’s called a republic. . . .
There’s a debate going on in the punditsphere about whether America is ungovernable. . . .
One of the depressing parts of the New Deal was its willingness to help big labor and big business, a classic case of the seen and the unseen...
When I first took economics, I learned from my textbook (Samuelson) the fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc...
At Big Think, they used one of my questions in their interview with Barney Frank: Question: How can Fannie and Freddie be structured to avoid the moral hazard problem and a too-cozy relationship with regulators? . . .
It has nothing to do with the bloated budget, the payoffs to political friends like the unions in bailing out Detroit and exempting them from health care taxes, the rising debt, the coddling of Wall Street, the stimulus package that didn’t stimulate, the grandiosity of redesigning the health care system and the energy sector. . . .
A review of episodes in economic and intellectual history indicates the superiority of a limited government market economy over the alternative models of economic organization. The siren calls of pundits, politicians, and even some economists in favor of communist central planning during the Great Depression; market socialism after World War II; and, more recently, massive welfare states and/or extensive government micromanagement of markets each ran afoul of their own problems and comparisons to the limited government (based on sound criteria) capitalist model. The limited government capitalist model, once again under attack from those who would greatly expand the role of government, needs its defenders, as the alternative models have proven historically, intellectually, and practically bankrupt.
Charles Kesler outlines the “grand liberal project” that began a century ago...
These are exciting though scary revolutionary times, akin to the constant acrimony in the fourth-century BC polis, mid-nineteenth century revolutionary Europe, or — perhaps in a geriatric replay — the 1960s. . . .
California is a rich state — as the world found out the last century. . . .