[rt]

I had the same idea:
Mises.org
Freedomainradio.comLibertyClassroom.com
Economicpolicyjournal.com
Tomwoods.com
Consultingbyrpm.com
Lfb.org
DollarVigilante.com
DailyPaul.com
TheDailyBell.com
Antiwar.com
LewRockwell.com
TheAmericanConservative.com

[rt]

I’m 18 years old right now. At first (about 3 years ago) I was actually interested in Islam and terrorism and I read books of neocon authors like David Horowitz and Robert Spencer. This got me interested in politics in general and I read typical rightwing websites. Unfortunately I bought into the idea that the US Govenment was spreading freedom around the globe. Fortunately this led me also to free market economics and authors like Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell (of whom I read ‘Basic Economics’). For a while I called myself a neocon but I’ve already felt that an interventionist foreign policy would be in contradiction with libertarian principles…
When the first debates started back in 2011I came across of Ron Paul and liked him despite his call for a non-interventionist foreign policy. However, conservatives, especially the neocons, hated him and I encountered Tom Woods through the Peter Schiff Show. He finally convinced me that war and big government cannot get along with liberty. I dumped all the conservative websites and became a limited government libertarian. I started to read the books of Steve Forbes, Tom Woods, Tom Dilorenzo etc. ‘The Law’ of Frédéric Bastiat was an importent book on my intellectual journey. The Mises Institute led me to Murray Rothbard who was of course an Anarcho-Capitalist. After having read lots of books on history, war, economics etc. I finally read ‘For A New Liberty’ and immediately therafter ‘Ethics of Liberty’. These books really got me thinking but did no convince me right away. Stefan Molyneux was important as well. ‘The Market for Liberty’ by Linda and Morris Tannehill pushed me finally over the edge and I considered myself an Anarchist after that read. While I did not have a job this summer I educated myself a lot and made perhaps the most important intellectual transformation of my lifetime…

I do not think that there’s one single book that would convert someone to Anarcho-Capitalism but a collection of different books. I’m currently reading ‘The Conscience of an Anarchist’ by Gary Chartier who calls himself a leftwing or market Anarchist. He focuses a lot about how the government hurts the poor and supports big corporations etc. A liberal might favor Gary’s approach to some others which may appear elitist or pro business.

[rt]

I’d say that it depends who you’re talking to. If you’re talking to a conservative about the Fed, I’d say something like this “You support and trust the free market and you know that central planning leads to chaos, money and banking are no exception….” If you’re talking to a liberal you might stress out how the Fed hurts the poor by destroying their savings through inflation and that the Fed bails out the big corporations etc. Liberals also tend to be more skeptical about US foreign policy and you might argue that just like today there were economic interests involved in the Civil War. You need to find out what the other person cares about and construct your argument respectively.

I’m 18 years old, have never voted and will never vote. The presidential elections have shown to me that we cannot break the chains of modern slavery through the political process. Once I realized this I’ve been more relaxed and less frustrated. I think we can only change things if we educate ourselves and others, knowledge is our most important weapon.

[rt]

Price gauging is not really a problem but the necessary adjustment process necessary for supply and demand to equilibrate. If demand for a product increases (as is the case now), its price has to rise. When this is not allowed to happen, there will be shortages as you see right now. Long lines are the consequence.

Check out this article:
http://lfb.org/today/gas-lines-are-not-sandys-fault/
and this video:

[rt]

Go to mises.org and read the first chapters of ‘Ethics of Liberty’ (Rothbard) or the first chapters of ‘For A New Liberty’ (Rothbard) for a shorter explanation.

[rt]

Romney repeatedly called China a currency manipulator because China has artificially decreased the value of their currency (by increasing money supply). As a result the US Dollar might buy more Renminbis and it’s cheaper for Americans to buy Chinese products than American products. This is according to Romney. He does not mention that the Fed has decreased the purchasing power of the US Dollar for years and that other Central Banks do the same to the currencies of their countries. Moreover Romney said that he favored tariffs to make it more expensive for Americans to buy Chinese products which protects American industry. American consumers would undoubtedly be harmed.
Regarding Iran, a currency can not only fall due to an increase in the money supply but also due to a decreased demand. Sanctions are hurting the Iranian economy which results in a lower demand for the Iranian currency.

[rt]

JohnD, here’s the way I see it:
If the Fed creates money out of thin air by purchasing assets, banks acquire deposit accounts at the Fed and have increased reserves. Now that their reserves have increased, they can lend out more money and increase the number of loans they can make. The supply of loanable money increases which causes the price (interest rate) to borrow money to fall (if demand stays the same). Thus monetary inflation (increase in the money supply) can lead to lower interest rates.
At some point the money created out of thin air pushes up prices which is called price inflation. As you said: “A decrease in the purchasing power of money brings about a higher interest rate, since lenders must take into account what the money they will be paid with will be worth in the future.”
I hope this helps. If I happen to be wrong, please correct me Dr Herbener!

[rt]

Sometimes I read that students can’t find a job even after years of college. Maybe the demand for people with college degree in the labour market is not high enough to justify the high number of students in college. I’d love to hear Dr Herbener’s take!

[rt]

I recommend the lectures on the American Revolution and the Constitution in the U.S. History Class.

[rt]

Do you need the permission of the State to marry?
Do I have the right to tell you which person you can or cannot marry?
Of course not!
I don’t think the government has anything to do with marriage. If you want to marry a person you love, do it in a church, a mosque, a synagogue or any other place. Why should the government be involved at all? The private sector would provide contracts that a married couple can sign if it wants to go beyond the symbolic meaning of marriage. As soon as the government gets involved, we have the same problems. Is gay marriage, polygamy etc. allowed? Some people would love to ban gay marriage others do not. Nobody should rule over his fellow citizens! This problem does not exist in the private sector. That’s my take

[rt]

I don’t think that colonialism and slavery would have been necessary for Europe to prospe. The norwegian countries (e.g. Sweden) have never had any colonies to my knowledge. However, they’re far more prosperous than former colonialist countries such as Portugal and Spain. You could also mention the example of Hong Kong, which was a british colony until 1994 but prospered anyway. Thus, I don’t think that there has to be a connection between colonialism and prosperity.

Hospitals, schools, roads, trains etc. have been provided by the private sector.
Tom Dilorenzo on trains:
http://mises.org/daily/2317#1
Walter Block on roads:
http://mises.org/document/4084
Andrew Coulson on schools:
http://www.amazon.com/Market-Education-Unknown-History-Philosophy/dp/1560004088
Terence Kealey on science funding:
http://www.amazon.com/Economic-Laws-Scientific-Research/dp/0312173067/ref=la_B000AQ3Y2A_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1350804865&sr=1-1

As long there is demand for a product or service, companies can make a profit by providing them. It does not really matter whether profits will be earned in the short of long run.

In a free society, roads would be privately owned. People want to see in the dark when walking or driving on the street, hence companies will provide them with light. If they did not, another company would see the opportunity to make a profit and provide lampposts. Competition would ensure lampposts etc. Shop owners along a street might also install lampposts to attract customers etc.

Think about Felix Baumgartner and RedBull! The whole mission was privately funded:
http://www.uncmirror.com/opinions/column-red-bull-continues-to-give-private-sector-wings-and-profits-1.2931972#
Think about all the cool stuff the private sector provides: computers, smartphones, airplanes, trains, cars, etc. But your friend wants you to beleive that it’s incapable of installing some lampposts?! If we get government out of the creativity of millions of profit seeking individuals will accomplish awesome things!

Of course competition increases quality and reduces prices over time. Why else are our computers, smartphones, cars etc. a lot better and cheaper than a couple of years ago?

The financial crisis was not a market failure but the cause of government interventionism (Federal Reserve Monetary policy and to a lesser degree housing policies). I recommend Tom Woods’s book Meltdown which deals with the recent financial crisis:
http://www.amazon.com/Meltdown-Free-Market-Collapsed-Government-Bailouts/dp/1596985879
The raw footage videos of ‘The Bubble’ film are great as well:
http://thebubblefilm.com/video-clips/

I also recommend Tom Woods’s book “Rollback”:
http://www.amazon.com/Rollback-Repealing-Government-Before-Collapse/dp/B005CDT7WM

[rt]

Wow that’s really spooky! 2 final questions:
1. What are the IOUs in the Social Security Trust Funds? Government bonds?
2. The U.S. Government would have to invest $222 trillions to pay for future obligations. Are these the obligations to all Americans alive that are already retired or will retire? Or is this the amount that the government would have to pay for retirees in the next 30, 40 or 50 years? I do not exactly understand what obligations are meant here. I hope you understand my question.

[rt]

Check out Frédéric Bastiat’s book “The Law”.

[rt]

Thank you so much! I don’t know where you always find the time to answer my questions. I’m reading lots of books on Austrian Economics right now and because I’m having discussions with my teachers and friends I need to know exactly what I’m talking about. I just want you to know that your efforts are always appreciated and are of great help to me! Keep up the great work!

[rt]

Thanks a lot! In summary, the Fed inflates the money supply during the boom to stimulate economic growth and inflates the money supply after the boom to bail out the failed banks?

[Author]

Posts