A short piece targetted at the Occupy protestors, based on The State by Bastiat.
Adapted by Clayton Bauman, who also assembled the images and edited the video.
Narration by me.
Journal of a Libertarian Anarchist and Austrian Economist
Tuesday, 7 February 2012
Of Private, Common, and Public Property (by Hans-Hermann Hoppe)
My reading of Hans-Hermann Hoppe's Of Private, Common, and Public Property
Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains the purpose and function of private property, clarifies the distinction between private, common and public property, and explains the rationale and principle of total privatization, exploring how public property can and ought to be privatized.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe explains the purpose and function of private property, clarifies the distinction between private, common and public property, and explains the rationale and principle of total privatization, exploring how public property can and ought to be privatized.
10 Propositions Austrian Economists Believe (by Peter Boettke)
My reading of Peter Boettke's Austrian Economics article at The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics.
10 Propositions Austrian Economists Believe:
Proposition 1: Only individuals choose.
Proposition 2: The study of the market order is fundamentally about exchange behavior and the institutions within which exchanges take place.
Proposition 3: The "facts" of the social sciences are what people believe and think.
Proposition 4: Utility and costs are subjective.
Proposition 5: The price system economizes on the information that people need to process in making their decisions.
Proposition 6: Private property in the means of production is a necessary condition for rational economic calculation.
Proposition 7: The competitive market is a process of entrepreneurial discovery.
Proposition 8: Money is nonneutral.
Proposition 9: The capital structure consists of heterogeneous goods that have multispecific uses that must be aligned.
Proposition 10: Social institutions often are the result of human action, but not of human design
10 Propositions Austrian Economists Believe:
Proposition 1: Only individuals choose.
Proposition 2: The study of the market order is fundamentally about exchange behavior and the institutions within which exchanges take place.
Proposition 3: The "facts" of the social sciences are what people believe and think.
Proposition 4: Utility and costs are subjective.
Proposition 5: The price system economizes on the information that people need to process in making their decisions.
Proposition 6: Private property in the means of production is a necessary condition for rational economic calculation.
Proposition 7: The competitive market is a process of entrepreneurial discovery.
Proposition 8: Money is nonneutral.
Proposition 9: The capital structure consists of heterogeneous goods that have multispecific uses that must be aligned.
Proposition 10: Social institutions often are the result of human action, but not of human design
Sunday, 30 October 2011
Some Questions for Georgists / Geo-Libertarians
I posted this at the progress.org forum...
I am willing to accept arguendo the ethical arguments that support land value recapture as described in the recent article by Edward B Miller.
He says "The land value must be recaptured to the fullest extent possible, not simply as a means for funding essential services. If the government is limited enough and well-managed enough to not require all of the land rent, it should still recapture all of it and distribute the surplus as a flat Citizen's Dividend, since that value truly does belong equally to all. This dividend would not only be essential for justice, but would provide a strong incentive for all parties to keep public services lean and efficient."
I have a number of questions about this passage.
1. What does he mean by "the fullest extent possible"? i.e. how does the government work out how much needs to be recaptured from each landowner, without crossing the line beyond which recapturing becomes aggression?
2. Roughly speaking, how much revenue do you expect the government to raise through full recapture, compared to, say, it's current tax revenue? More? Less? What if this is not enough to cover all "essential services"?
3. Who decides what an "essential service" is? What happens if there is a disagreement among the citizens about whether recaptured money should be used to pay for some service, or whether it should be left to market competition?
4. For any services that are to be provided by the government or paid for out of recaptured money, how will economic calculation be carried out? i.e. in the absence of free market competition and free market prices, how can the government know that it is using resources efficiently?
5. How will the government operate, ideally? Monarchy? Democracy? How will public-choice issues such as the influence of special interest groups whenever there is a government, be avoided? How large a land area ought each government to cover, and is secession allowed?
That'll do for now. Thanks.
I am willing to accept arguendo the ethical arguments that support land value recapture as described in the recent article by Edward B Miller.
He says "The land value must be recaptured to the fullest extent possible, not simply as a means for funding essential services. If the government is limited enough and well-managed enough to not require all of the land rent, it should still recapture all of it and distribute the surplus as a flat Citizen's Dividend, since that value truly does belong equally to all. This dividend would not only be essential for justice, but would provide a strong incentive for all parties to keep public services lean and efficient."
I have a number of questions about this passage.
1. What does he mean by "the fullest extent possible"? i.e. how does the government work out how much needs to be recaptured from each landowner, without crossing the line beyond which recapturing becomes aggression?
2. Roughly speaking, how much revenue do you expect the government to raise through full recapture, compared to, say, it's current tax revenue? More? Less? What if this is not enough to cover all "essential services"?
3. Who decides what an "essential service" is? What happens if there is a disagreement among the citizens about whether recaptured money should be used to pay for some service, or whether it should be left to market competition?
4. For any services that are to be provided by the government or paid for out of recaptured money, how will economic calculation be carried out? i.e. in the absence of free market competition and free market prices, how can the government know that it is using resources efficiently?
5. How will the government operate, ideally? Monarchy? Democracy? How will public-choice issues such as the influence of special interest groups whenever there is a government, be avoided? How large a land area ought each government to cover, and is secession allowed?
That'll do for now. Thanks.
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)