Another good one from Stossel.
Jake Novak at CNBC does get one thing right in this very strange and I would say ill informed op-ed. Even though he says from the outset that he is actually for legalization he explains why legal pot will nonetheless contribute to income inequality. I think his concerns for the most part are not really concerns. At least not on a societal level.
Washington and the Fed think they can plan out society. That they can manipulate the levers of the economy to elicit positive outcomes (mostly for them). That leaving the world to the “whims of the marketplace” is madness. That dispassionate managers (no one is dispassionate, especially political managers) can and will make the world anew. There is no God. Government is God and it will giveth and taketh as it pleases.
Nine. I wonder what Mr. Moore’s carbon footprint is?
A great explanation of the difference between the two is attached. And we agree, it is vital that the current renaissance in classically liberal thought continues to grow. Life, liberty, and property are beautiful ideas and the world would be a much better place (safer, more educated, generally more fulfilled) if people had a better understanding of these concepts.
Being “pro-market” means being pro-innovation, pro-competition, pro-transparency, pro-rule of law, pro-hard work, pro-efficiency. Being “pro-business” can on occasion mean these things also but typically it does not.
He admits that world central banks are messing up.
Barron’s distinguished economic analyst Gene Epstein pointed out in an article May 31st that increasing economic inequality is not caused by capitalism, but rather by Crony Capitalism. He also cites Hunter Lewis’s book Crony Capitalism in America 2008-2012:
Passwords are too easy to hack we are told. Much better to have a government issued Internet ID one must sign in with every time one logs on. Much better to have the government issue a license to access information.
One password to rule them all.
Piketty rose out of nowhere like a rocket, propelled by the Obama administration and an #oldmedia which loved the narrative the French professor was selling.
In the last couple of weeks however, as people have read the book, the gravity of peer review has started to bring the rocket down nearly as fast as it went up.