MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Freedom’

100 Years of Being Too Afraid of Freedom — Government Has Capitalized on That Fear

Posted by M. C. on January 7, 2023

https://rumble.com/v247lau-100-years-of-being-too-afraid-of-freedom-government-has-capitalized-on-that.html

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The Biggest Obstacle To Real Freedom Is The Belief That We Already Have It

Posted by M. C. on December 12, 2022

Real individualism would encourage radical individuality and divergence from orthodoxies. The so-called liberal democracies of the western world do the exact opposite, hammering us into authorized power-serving perspectives and herding us into mainstream partisan echo chambers where we get to argue about how the empire should exist instead of if it should. Real individuality is stomped out and replaced with prostheses of mindless consumption and partisan thought.

https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/the-biggest-obstacle-to-real-freedom?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Caitlin Johnstone

If you live in one of the so-called free democracies of the western world, the worst mistake you can make is to buy into the hype. To believe you are a free individual in a nation that respects and protects your freedom and individuality.

Whenever I broach this subject I always get a deluge of objections along the lines of, “Well I’d much rather live where I live than under an authoritarian regime like in Iran or China! You would never be allowed to criticize your rulers the way you do if you lived in one of those places!”

And I always want to ask them, what do you think drove you to make that objection? Why are you falling all over yourself to defend your country and the people who rule over you, while condemning foreign countries that your own government happens to dislike? Could it be because that’s how you’ve been trained to behave from a young and impressionable age, and that your objection is arising from the same place as a cult member’s objections to criticisms of their cult?

Because that’s ultimately what holds power structures together in the US-aligned nations of the global north: indoctrination. The same thing used to program religious extremists and cult members. The only difference is that rather than scripture and religious leaders, the means of indoctrination is school, mainstream media, and Silicon Valley algorithm manipulation.

Without mass-scale indoctrination into power-serving narratives about nation, government and world, the power structures which rule over us would immediately collapse. People would cease voluntarily behaving in ways that benefit those power structures, cease acknowledging their government as a legitimate authority, cease pretending elections are real procedures for determining their government’s actions, cease believing they’re receiving truthful information from the mass indoctrination media, and use the power of their numbers to organize in ways which benefit the many rather than an elite few.

This is what one is defending when one objects to being told that they don’t live in a free society. Their objection is itself the product of the reality they are denying. 

In reality we are not truly freer under our rulers than people are under the governments that our rulers hate. Sure people can post criticisms of their elected officials online, but those criticisms will be dismissed and ignored by everyone who matters, they are being directed at political figureheads with no real power, and they are coming from minds that have been deeply indoctrinated into power-serving worldviews. Your rulers do not care if you’re a Democrat who hates Republicans or a Republican who hates Democrats, as long as you’re plugged in to one of the authorized reality tunnels.

As Noam Chomsky put it, “Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.” 

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

TGIF: Why Freedom Is the Goal | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on December 12, 2022

The point is that any enlargement [of state authority], good or bad, reduces the scope of individual responsibility, and thus retards and cripples the education which can be a product of nothing but the free exercise of moral judgment…. The profound instinct against being “done for our own good” … is wholly sound. Men are aware of the need of this moral experience as a condition of growth, and they are aware, too, that anything tending to ease it off from them, even for their own good, is to be profoundly distrusted. The practical reason for freedom, then, is that freedom seems to be the only condition under which any kind of substantial moral fibre can be developed. [Emphasis added.]

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/tgif-why-freedom/

by Sheldon Richman

In online interviews and conversations I’m hearing intellectuals in the national conservative movement say that the liberal Enlightenment “project” has mostly failed because people need more in their lives than freedom. I’ve also heard this from a few people who have lately become disillusioned with leftism but yet are uneasy about libertarianism.

My first response is to wonder whom these critics of classical liberalism, or libertarianism, its modern-day form, have in mind. Which important and widely influential liberal political, economic, or, social thinker even implied that freedom is the only thing worth valuing? Let’s name names, please. I can’t think of one, but perhaps I’m overlooking someone.

Those conservatives will also insist that freedom without virtue is not just worthless but a clear and present danger. But again, which past and present of genuine liberal stalwarts would disagree? I’ve always understood liberalism to be distinct from libertinism. I see no grounds for confusing the two.

Classical liberalism, in its consequentialist, deontological, and eudaemonist forms, has been concerned with what makes for a proper society by some articulated standard or other, starting with the most fundamental unit of analysis, the individual. The literature is saturated with positive observations about society, the division of labor, association, and rich communities — in a word, cooperation.

One way or another, all of that is related to values in addition to freedom; it all is related to virtue. Far from embodying an atomistic, licentious, to-hell-with-everyone-else (pseudo)individualism, libertarianism extols what I call Adamistic (Smith, that is) individualism, in which human beings “selfishly” flourish through mutually rewarding relationships of all kinds. I’ve also dubbed this “molecular individualism. Of course, some people will engage in vice and aggression (those aren’t the same things), but as long as the state is unavailable for social engineering, free individuals using private property in association with others can peacefully protect themselves and their children from what they find abhorrent. Live and let live is the rule.

For liberals, freedom was never just an end in itself. Freedom means freedom from aggression, whatever the source, but at least implicit in the liberal vision — and indispensable to truly understanding it — is the freedom to produce material and nonmaterial values in a social context. We want freedom so we may live fully as human beings and enjoy fruitful lives among other people. Successful long-term participation in the market and society more widely encourages honesty, justice, and conscientiousness — virtues by any reckoning. To understand the value of society is to understand the need for — yes — order, but it is specifically the bottom-up, emergent, spontaneous order that F. A. Hayek and other liberals have emphasized. (You find this in Adam Smith, Thomas Paine, Herbert Spencer, Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, and countless others.)

The critics of liberalism are right of course when they say that freedom is not enough to properly address the social problems we observe today. But again, which libertarian ever said it was? The libertarian point is that freedom is the condition in which people have the best chance of dealing with problems. Liberalism doesn’t promise a rose garden; it’s not utopian. In fact, freedom is not the answer to any problem. Rather, it — along with the resulting decentralization and competition — is essential to the discovery process that enables people to deal with problems as best they can. Since no one is omniscient, that discovery process is indispensable both for the good life and the good society.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Freedom Only Needs A Tiny (Often Imperceptible) Opening, And It Wins

Posted by M. C. on December 4, 2022

The Ron Paul Liberty Report

https://rumble.com/v1yi2pk-freedom-only-needs-a-tiny-often-imperceptible-opening-and-it-wins.html

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Liberty, Freedom, and Sovereignty Aren’t On Today’s Ballot | The Libertarian Institute

Posted by M. C. on November 9, 2022

  • I cannot use my property as I see appropriate and in a way that maximizes my utility function without their consent.
  • I cannot start a business without their permission.
  • I cannot hire who I want to hire.
  • I cannot fire who I want to fire.
  • I cannot set wages I deem appropriate in my business even if set by mutual consent.
  • I am compelled to work half of my life to benefit them and others who engage in coercion to confiscate my property for someone else’s use. (In fact, it’d be criminal of me to claim my property as mine, instead of only keeping the percentage I have permission to have.)

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/liberty-freedom-and-sovereignty-arent-on-todays-ballot/

by Jeffrey Wernick | Nov 8, 2022

pexels element digital 1550337 (1)

Today, once again, we have the most important, crucial election in the history of mankind. The fate of the planet, solar system, galaxy, and universe depends upon it. Even God is worried, praying. Maybe it will provoke an extinction level event.

I, personally, will not vote. I will not vote because what I value most is not represented on the ballot; my liberty, my freedom, my personal sovereignty. I do not question the legality of the process. I question its legitimacy. Since I deem it illegitimate and I believe in the non-aggression principle, I choose not to participate in any process I deem illegitimate. I do not question that I will be legally bound, against my will, to whatever the outcome is.

I find it so ironic that we masquerade by voting as if those in power truly care about our consent. They designed a world where we have only privileges to be granted at their discretion. They require that we ask their permission to do just about anything and everything. I thought our Founders signed a Declaration of Independence, not a Declaration of Dependence. I thought the Bill of Rights placed constraints and limitations on government, not a Bill of Privileges granted at their discretion and enforced with violence. I understood government required our consent, not that the governed required the consent from those who govern. Wow, have I gotten things so wrong!

Every major candidate on the ballot today agree on most issues. They all campaign on the fact that;

  • Our children and grandchildren will be burdened by an odious debt accumulated without their consent.
  • I cannot buy what I want to buy if they do not like where it is made.
  • I cannot sell my property (my property!) if they do not like who I am selling it to.
  • I cannot use my property as I see appropriate and in a way that maximizes my utility function without their consent.
  • I cannot start a business without their permission.
  • I cannot hire who I want to hire.
  • I cannot fire who I want to fire.
  • I cannot set wages I deem appropriate in my business even if set by mutual consent.
  • I am compelled to work half of my life to benefit them and others who engage in coercion to confiscate my property for someone else’s use. (In fact, it’d be criminal of me to claim my property as mine, instead of only keeping the percentage I have permission to have.)
  • I cannot move without telling the government my new residence.
  • I cannot perform certain jobs without obtaining an occupational license.
  • I cannot buy and sell with the money I choose because of legal tender laws.
  • I cannot go anywhere without being monitored through warrantless surveillance.
  • The president can invade any country at this discretion because of an unconditional grant of authority called an Authorization for Use of Military Force. (By the way, who consented to pay for these endless wars? I guess the generation not yet born granted their consent through proxy to the president…)

By now, hopefully you understand why I choose not to vote. It is a masquerade.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Anarchy Means Only No Rule, No Rulers; In Other Words — Freedom

Posted by M. C. on October 4, 2022

Anarchy simply means without rule or without rulers; in other words, people working, living, trading, communicating, traveling, and surviving peacefully without government masters and government rule. This is the only state of being that can bring about absolute freedom of the individual.

By Gary D. Barnett


 “Anarchists did not try to carry out genocide against the Armenians in Turkey; they did not deliberately starve millions of Ukrainians; they did not create a system of death camps to kill Jews, gypsies, and Slavs in Europe; they did not fire-bomb scores of large German and Japanese cities and drop nuclear bombs on two of them; they did not carry out a ‘Great Leap Forward’ that killed scores of millions of Chinese; they did not attempt to kill everybody with any appreciable education in Cambodia; they did not launch one aggressive war after another; they did not implement trade sanctions that killed perhaps 500,000 Iraqi children.

In debates between anarchists and statists, the burden of proof clearly should rest on those who place their trust in the state. Anarchy’s mayhem is wholly conjectural; the state’s mayhem is undeniably, factually horrendous.”

Robert Higgs

Language is of such great importance as to be critical to the survival of mankind. While this may sound exaggerated, it is certainly not. The idea of our language, and the root systems from which our language originated, are not able to be altered at will to suit the state or any other individual or entity attempting to create a position based on the fraudulent restructuring of the meaning of words and phrases for their benefit. This is always and only done, to create confusion or to advance an agenda, and usually both. Anytime the state actors decide to control language in their favor, they are intending to steer mass opinion, and contradiction, hypocrisy, and control are the prevailing result. This has never been more apparent than with the term Anarchy, which is the absolute antithesis of state tyranny.

Anarchy simply means without rule or without rulers; in other words, people working, living, trading, communicating, traveling, and surviving peacefully without government masters and government rule. This is the only state of being that can bring about absolute freedom of the individual. The completely bastardized and fraudulent meaning that has been effectively changed, promoted, and propagandized by the state, its institutions, its dictionaries, and its media today concerning the word “anarchy,’ has had the effect thorough indoctrination and brainwashing, of appearing to the lowly ‘public’ as the exact opposite of its true meaning. This purposely induced mindset was planned and done for specific reasons, as honest and legitimate anarchists, are the enemy of state power, and therefore considered dangerous; not to the people, but to those wishing to manipulate and control the people.  These are the ruling class, their politicians, their enforcers, and all government in general. These are the true and evil enemies of humanity and freedom.

The state’s new forged and illegitimate ‘definition’ of the word “anarchy,” is meant to hide the truth, confuse, and control the now ignorant collective masses. This fake definition that is used by all mainstream media and government to marginalize all promoters of freedom, is completely contrary to the actual meaning of the word. Anarchy, according to government tyrants, is said to be a state or society without laws in the midst of political and social disorder due to no government ‘control.’

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

How Freedom Helps us Cooperate to Achieve Superabundance

Posted by M. C. on September 5, 2022

In conclusion, superabundance depends on two main components: people and freedom. People who are free to think, speak, read, publish, and interact with others will generate ideas, and their market-tested ideas will lead to progress. The more people the planet has and the more freedom they enjoy, the greater the likelihood that new good ideas will be generated to tackle current and future problems.

by Gale Pooley and Marian L. Tupy

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/tupy-superabundance/

The following is a summary of Superabundance: The Story of Population Growth, Innovation, and Human Flourishing on an Infinitely Bountiful Plant by Marian L. Tupy and Gale Pooley, reprinted with permission.

In the first part of this book, the human propensity toward the negative is contrasted with the generally improving state of the world. Instead of the apocalypse that humanity has been expecting since the dawn of time, the world has seen great progress. One of the persistent sources of concern about the present state of the world and the future of humanity is population growth. Some people fear this might lead to the exhaustion of resources, thus ending in a calamity for the planet and the species that inhabit it. But there are many reasons why that need not be the case.

In the second part of the book, the concern over population growth and resource abundance is put to an empirical test using the Tupy-Pooley Resource Abundance Framework (see below). The framework uses a new methodology to measure the change in abundance relative to the change in wages. It includes two levels of analysis: a personal level and a population level. To use a pizza analogy, personal resource abundance measures the size of a slice of pizza per person. Population resource abundance measures the size of the entire pizza pie.

Looking at hundreds of commodities, goods, and services spanning two centuries, the authors found that abundance almost invariably grew, often substantially. In general, personal resource abundance grows by more than 3 percent per year, thereby doubling every 20 years or so. The population resource abundance analysis showed that resources have been growing more abundant by more than 4 percent per year, thereby doubling every 16 years or so. Moreover, it showed that humanity is experiencing “superabundance,” a condition where abundance is increasing at a faster rate than the population is growing.

Put differently, the data suggest that a growing population tends to benefit, rather than impoverish, humanity. That vindicates University of Maryland economist Julian Simon’s observation that “Our supplies of natural resources are not finite in any economic sense. Nor does past experience give reason to expect natural resources to become scarcer. Rather, if history is any guide, natural resources will progressively become less costly, hence less scarce, and will constitute a smaller proportion of our expenses in future years.”

In the third part of this book, some of the main reasons for the growth in abundance are examined. Unlike nonhuman animals, people flourish by developing sophisticated ways of cooperating and gaining knowledge. Not only do humans trade more intensively and extensively than other species; more importantly, they constantly innovate. It is innovation that distinguishes relatively slow Smithian growth (a process of adding more people, land, and capital to production processes) from the relatively fast Schumpeterian growth (a process of economic expansion powered by technological change).

The process of innovation, however, can be disruptive and thus threatening to the status quo.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Trapped by Imperialist Leviathans: The Case for Freedom in Central and Eastern Europe

Posted by M. C. on August 26, 2022

This is how Poland operated at the end of the 1980s, and that is how Ukraine should act today. Even if, in the broader context, the Ukrainian-Russian conflict is in fact a clash between the American empire and “Russian mir,” we must nevertheless view it as an attempt to move Ukraine toward complete independence and freedom because they chose to be with the West.

Not so simple. If Ukraine goes West, the US will try it’s hardest to make Ukraine a puppet.

https://mises.org/wire/trapped-imperialist-leviathans-case-freedom-central-and-eastern-europe

Karol Mazur

In the previous articles I touched upon the question about subject of global American hegemony and its consequences for freedom. Now let’s look at the problem from another perspective. In the 1980s, Poland viewed the United States as a country capable of defeating the “Evil Empire” (USSR) and thus sowing throughout the Soviet bloc ideas of freedom that were so close to societies tormented by the yoke of communism.

Today, Poland’s enthusiasm for the United States and its presence in Eastern Europe has not waned. The latest polls confirm that over 80 percent of Poles surveyed are in favor of a permanent presence of American troops in Poland. And Poland is ready to pay for that.

Ukraine, like Poland once has no alternative, believes today that the help of one imperialism will help it liberate itself from other imperialism and thus build the freedom and security it desires. Freedom from geopolitical dependencies and geographic determinism. In other words, freedom from the monstrous influences of empires.

But the times are changing, in the Western world too. Unfortunately, freedom values in the Western world are subject to change by their own institutions and social revolution. So we need to be honest, the threat to Central and Eastern Europe comes not only from imperialistic Russian aggression, but also from potentially something which we can call as an illiberal liberalism, which is the common norm in the progressive federalization of the EU.

When entering the Western world in its newest version, Ukraine must be ready to accept also the ideological agenda of certain values currently hidden not only in the today’s United States, but also in the European Union. Taking into account its relatively conservative society, the process of accepting social solutions currently flowing from the Western world, in the long term may be difficult for Ukrainians to accept. Ukraine’s integration with the European Union may over time, resemble that experienced of countries such as Poland and Hungary, which oppose the centralist solutions of Brussels.

Progressive theories, redefinition of the concept of the family, political correctness and oppressive institutional postmodernism in other social relations probably mean that the pendulum of freedom, in which the countries of Central and Eastern Europe so strongly believed, again leans toward oppressive despotism. The European Union is dominated by completely left-wing elites currently waging a cultural war, and the values that are institutionally promoted are not fully accepted by countries such as Poland or Hungary. There is therefore a conflict within the EU itself. A conflict between the old union (Western countries) and the new union in the form of the former Soviet bloc countries that joined it recently.

These are the differences that the British writer and commentator Douglas Murray skillfully described and presented, he explained that if the EU wants to survive, it must respect the otherness of Central and Eastern Europe. This difference is due to the fact that Central and Eastern Europe was dependent on the “Soviet soldier’s rifle” for almost half a century, while Western countries enjoyed complete freedom.

These differences were also perfectly understood by President Donald J. Trump, who during his visit to Poland at Krasiński Square referred to the prayer acclamation that is close to Polish hearts: we want God! This speech touched Polish hearts and today it is impossible to demonstrate a similar approach in the position of Joe Biden’s administration. Another important thing is to say that the Ukrainian issue divided Poland’s strong alliance with Hungary.

Conclusion

Taking all the arguments into account, it must be said that the Ukrainians chose the West, which, as we have already mentioned, is not an ideal, but gives for them a better perspective for life than submission to the Eastern satraps. Maybe Ukraine takes just a pragmatic position in this case and fight for freedom, turning to the EU and the US as the only available alternative.

Ukraine looks to the rich West and would like to join this category. Paradoxically, the weak structures of political and economic statism give Ukraine a chance to triumph in a libertarian economic perspective while preserving their conservative values. In the face of difficult times, clashes of powers, the libertarian perspective in this region of the world should focus on getting the most out of it.

This is how Poland operated at the end of the 1980s, and that is how Ukraine should act today. Even if, in the broader context, the Ukrainian-Russian conflict is in fact a clash between the American empire and “Russian mir,” we must nevertheless view it as an attempt to move Ukraine toward complete independence and freedom because they chose to be with the West.

Author:

Karol Mazur

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Freedom Has Departed the Western World

Posted by M. C. on June 21, 2022

Dr. Gold, like so many other medical doctors, such as Dr. Pierre Kory  and Dr. Peter McCullough, are being punished for interfering with Big Pharma’s profits, which are shared with Fauci and other NIH officials who serve Big Pharma, not public health, as marketing specialists.

Paul Craig Roberts

Dr. Simone Gold, founder of America’s Frontline Doctors, a group that saved huge numbers of American lives by treating Covid patients with Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, while Big Pharma and its captive hospitals and Biden regime killed huge numbers of Americans with non-treatment and with ventilators, remdesivir and mRNA “vaccines,” has been sentenced to prison for two months and fined $10,000. https://www.theepochtimes.com/dr-simone-gold-sentenced-to-two-months-in-prison-and-fines-for-capitol-breach_4540013.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-17-3&utm_medium=email&est=ub1wSxyo8shuuGHBHpHpN96Cnb3v2iUZcM2XFQDfqvNJNB3Av0ooRg%3D%3D

The ostensible excuse is that she stepped inside the Capitol through the door opened by the police not to protest the stolen election or to insurrect, but to deliver a warning about coercive Covid mandates, which she did.

She was charged with entering a restricted building–note that the halls of democracy, the people’s house, is a restricted building–violent entry, and disorderly conduct, all false charges.

Dr. Gold expressed her regret for entering the Capitol, a requirement so that the Nazi justice system didn’t sentence her to 20 years or death for saving lives. Dr. Gold, like so many other medical doctors, such as Dr. Pierre Kory ( https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/they-are-trying-to-revoke-dr-pierre?utm_source=email ) and Dr. Peter McCullough, are being punished for interfering with Big Pharma’s profits, which are shared with Fauci and other NIH officials who serve Big Pharma, not public health, as marketing specialists.

The power of an utterly corrupt Big Pharma over the American Board of Internal Medicine to take away medical licenses of doctors, who saved lives by not following Big Pharma’s Covid protocols, is extraordinary. It proves that independent medicine does not exist in the United States. Big Pharma has control over who practices medicine and how medicine is practiced.

The United States itself is so Nazified that there is no wonder the US supports the Ukrainian Nazis. In “the land of the free” parents cannot even complain to school boards about the indoctrination of their children under the guise of “education” without being beat up and arrested. If this isn’t Third Reich, what is?

What the Covid orchestration has told us is that there is not a single country in the Western World that believes in liberty and human rights. Every “Western democracy” is willing to deceive and coerce its citizens just as dictatorships do.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

TGIF: The Libertarian Solution

Posted by M. C. on June 10, 2022

But strictly speaking, the libertarian philosophy offers no solutions to specific problems. That’s not what it does. It is not itself a solution. Rather, it describes an institutional environment in which imaginative people are free and motivated to discover innovative solutions to individual and collective problems.

https://libertarianinstitute.org/articles/tgif-the-libertarian-solution/

by Sheldon Richman 

“What’s the libertarian solution to social or economic problem X? How about problem Y or Z?”

No libertarian needs to wait long before hearing such questions. But strictly speaking, the libertarian philosophy offers no solutions to specific problems. That’s not what it does. It is not itself a solution. Rather, it describes an institutional environment in which imaginative people are free and motivated to discover innovative solutions to individual and collective problems.

That environment has moral, cultural, economic, and legal dimensions, all grounded in self-ownership, respect for others, property, competition, persuasion, and consent, as opposed to government authority, monopoly, decree, and coercion. The cultural dimension is especially important, though often unappreciated. Widespread resentment toward other people’s success, for example, is literally deadly, not only for those targeted but for society at large, especially those at the bottom.

Thus when a libertarian says freedom or the free market will solve a particular problem (if politicians stand aside), what sounds like an impossibly oversimplified response is actually highly complex. In contrast to the politicians’ boasts, note the humility here. Confidence in market problem-solving is confidence in free human imagination dispersed among countless individuals throughout society. Who can say who will come up with the solution? No one. That in part is why we need everyone to be free.

The unique grounding of the libertarian environment has far different built-in incentives for problem-solvers than any state-based alternative. State problem-solving is characterized by centralized bureaucracy, artificial knowledge constraints, nonconsensual financing (taxation) that precludes feedback, profligacy (producing the disruptive knowledge distortions of debt and inflation), and significant unaccountability. In contrast, social- or market-based problem-solving is characterized by multiple knowledge centers, competition, consensual financing, and the profit motive. In that environment proposed solutions are subjected to intellectual and product competition, which yields better knowledge than other arrangements. F. A. Hayek called competition a “discovery” process. I think of it as the universal solvent.

In the market, problems are potential profit opportunities for entrepreneurs, and as we know, the profit motive is potent. The entrepreneur’s job is to figure out where and how resources are used suboptimally relative to what people (not politicians) want most. Solving a problem often requires shifting scarce resources and labor from one purpose to another.

How can anyone know what’s the best way to go? Entrepreneurs find clues to that question in market prices, which is why the price system is so important and must not be tampered with by politicians and bureaucrats. If an entrepreneur is correct when thinks he can buy a quantity of resources and hire labor at one price per finished-product unit and make something people will want to buy at a sufficiently higher price, he will earn a profit. That’s a sign the enterprise solved a problem for its customers. Profit in the free market (absent government intervention) is a reward for success. It’s not a dirty word.

Indispensable to the entrepreneurial function is the consumers’ freedom to accept or reject offers as they see fit. Both responses communicate vital information to the problem-solvers. Coercion, the government’s way of doing things, sabotages the function.

The freedom-based process is vital in our world of scarcity, trade-offs, and imperfect knowledge. Improvement is always possible, and imperfect knowledge is not the only reason. Another is that people’s preferences change. What they wanted yesterday they may not want tomorrow, especially if something new comes along. A third reason is that the array of resources changes, with new materials, technologies, and organization methods proving superior to the old. Government restraints on this process do a disservice to people trying to improve their lives, especially those who have yet to “make it.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »