Not Much Blogging Next Month
I won't be blogging much in May because I have a number of exams.
Libertarianism from a practical, consequentialist perspective.
Congratulations to Former Estonian Prime Minister Mart Laar for winning the 2006 Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty. Here's an excerpt:
If you haven't been reading Greg Mankiw's blog then I recommend you start right now. He links to a paper that examines the risks associated with Social Security. I am always suprised to hear people say that Social Security is a "sure thing" while the market is risky. Well, Social Security has what's called "political risk". Essentially, it means that the Congress can fiddle with the formula used to make Social Security payments (e.g. raising the retirement age).
Damn, I should have voted for this guy when I had the chance. Senator McClintock makes a classic reductio ad absurdum case against minimum wage increases here:
Hey, just because it's a holiday doesn't mean there's an excuse to stop blogging. I found this hilariously titled article called Most Americans Still Say Tax System Unjust. It just seems kind of obvious that our tax system is unjust. You can find some interesting information here. The top half of American income earners pay almost all of the income taxes, while the other half essentially enjoys a free ride. That doesn't sound just to me. You know the odd thing is that the free rider argument is usually used against libertarianism, but the status quo is rife with free riders. This reminds of that classic Bastiat quote, "The state is the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else."
From CapMag:
Social Issues Top GOP Pre-Election Agenda:
This is intended for a British audience, but it's one of the best articles I've ever read against the idea of state funding of political parties (free registration required). Here's an excerpt:
From Greg Mankiw:
It looks like if Julian Simon made his infamous wager today he would still be right:
The California legislature is considering a proposal that would "require school textbooks to include lessons on how gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender persons have helped California develop." Now if you're not familiar with how California runs its education system you're probably asking yourself why this is an issue in the first place. Believe it or not, the California Government can decide what goes into a text book. As the article shows, this process opens itself to all sorts of rent-seeking organizations that want to get their version of history put into text books. I blogged about this phenomenon earlier.
Thank goodness for the work done by the Citizens Against Government Waste. They do an excellent job keeping track of waste. Here's a taste of what has come out of Washington recently:
From the Guardian: