Time Preference

the wealth gap isn't widening because of capitalism it's widening because asset owners benefit from monetary expansion while wage earners suffer from currency debasement the cantillon effect isn't a market failure, it's a policy feature

the state cannot enforce law neutrally who writes the laws? the state who interprets the laws? state judges who enforces the laws? state police who adjudicates disputes? state courts who appeals decisions? higher state courts who funds the system? forced taxation every layer is the same entity plaintiff defendant judge jury all within one monopoly imagine if walmart wrote the rules interpreted the rules enforced the rules and you couldn't opt out that's the state monopoly on law is monopoly on justice and monopolies don't serve customers they exploit them

under capitalism scarcity is allocated by price under socialism scarcity is allocated by politics who decides who gets the apartment? who decides who gets the visa? who decides who gets the surgery? who decides who gets the university spot? party membership connections bribes loyalty prices are impersonal politics is personal prices reward productivity politics rewards obedience

the socialist theory of exploitation workers create all value capitalists steal surplus value profit is theft but this ignores time preference risk coordination capital accumulation the worker wants payment now the capitalist waits for revenue later the worker avoids business risk the capitalist absorbs it the worker provides labor the capitalist provides tools machinery buildings distribution profit is payment for waiting and risk not theft

taxation is not a social contract you never signed no opt-out clause no negotiation no consent it's a protection racket with better branding pay or we seize your property pay or we cage you pay or we garnish your wages the mafia offers the same deal the difference is the mafia doesn't call it civic duty

all state property is illegitimate property legitimate property comes from original appropriation or voluntary transfer the state acquires through taxation expropriation eminent domain the state homesteaded nothing the state produced nothing the state traded for nothing every government building every military base every public park built with stolen resources on stolen land the state is the largest property thief in history

secession is the ultimate check on state power if you can leave the state must compete if you cannot leave the state can exploit the right to exit forces accountability lincoln invaded the south to prevent secession the soviet union built walls to prevent secession every empire in history opposed secession why? because secession destroys the tax base parasites need captive hosts

the business cycle is not a natural feature of markets it's the result of credit expansion central bank lowers rates below market businesses borrow cheap money malinvestment occurs resources flow to unsustainable projects the boom feels real then reality hits interest rates rise projects can't be completed liquidation begins recession corrects the distortions the bust is the cure not the disease mises explained this in 1912 every major crash since confirms it the fed creates the boom then blames capitalism for the bust

natural rights exist independent of government you own yourself before any law says so you own your labor before any constitution grants it rights don't come from documents documents recognize rights that already exist the declaration didn't create your rights it acknowledged them if government grants rights government can revoke rights if rights are natural government can only violate them this is why rothbard rejected legal positivism law doesn't create morality law either reflects natural law or contradicts it your right to life doesn't depend on a vote it exists because you exist

the public goods argument: some goods are non-excludable and non-rivalrous markets underproduce them therefore the state must provide them but lighthouses were privately built and profitable for centuries private roads existed before public ones private courts resolved disputes before state courts private security protects more property than police the theory assumes markets fail the evidence shows markets succeed what actually happens: entrepreneurs find excludability mechanisms subscriptions tolls memberships contracts or they bundle the good with excludable goods radio is non-excludable advertising made it profitable the public goods argument is an excuse for taxation not an economic necessity

predatory pricing is economic fiction the theory: big company sells below cost to drive out competitors then raises prices to monopoly levels once competition is gone the reality: no documented case of this ever working why? selling below cost loses money fast competitors can wait it out or new ones enter when you raise prices back up the predator goes bankrupt before the prey does every alleged case of predatory pricing in history either never happened or the "predator" was just more efficient and kept prices low permanently standard oil lowered prices and kept them low amazon sells cheap because of scale not because they're waiting to jack up prices later the predatory pricing myth is used to justify antitrust intervention against companies whose only crime is charging less

voting is not consent if i vote against a policy and it passes anyway i'm still forced to obey if i don't vote at all i'm still forced to obey if i vote for the losing candidate i'm still forced to fund the winner's agenda where's the consent? democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on dinner then claiming the sheep consented because it had a vote majority rule doesn't create legitimacy it just means 51% get to force their will on 49% real consent requires the right to say no and walk away voting gives you neither

the healthcare crisis is a government creation 1910: doctors compete prices fall quality rises anyone can practice medicine 1910-1920: AMA lobbies for licensing laws competitors shut out supply restricted prices rise 1943: wage controls during WWII companies can't raise wages so they offer health insurance instead tax exemption created now insurance is tied to employment 1965: medicare and medicaid passed government becomes largest healthcare buyer demand surges prices surge 1973: certificate of need laws hospitals need government permission to expand supply restricted again 2010: ACA mandates coverage insurers must cover pre-existing conditions premiums double every crisis in healthcare follows government intervention every solution proposed is more government intervention the free market didn't fail in healthcare it was never allowed to operate

the minimum wage prices out the least skilled workers who gets hurt most? the teenager with no experience the ex-convict trying to rebuild the immigrant with limited english the worker with a disability they're worth $8/hour of productivity the law says employers must pay $15 so they don't get hired at all $0/hour helps no one but politicians get to claim they 'fought for workers' while the unemployable stay unemployable

eminent domain is theft with a gavel you own your house the state wants your land for a stadium they offer 'fair market value' you refuse they take it anyway if i did this it's robbery when the state does this it's 'public use' same action different uniform different legal status property rights mean nothing if the state can override them whenever 'the public' benefits and who decides what benefits the public? the same people taking your property

the market failure argument: markets sometimes produce suboptimal outcomes therefore the state must intervene but this assumes: the state knows the optimal outcome the state acts to achieve it the state doesn't create worse problems politicians aren't self-interested bureaucrats have perfect information regulators can't be captured every assumption is false comparing real markets to imaginary perfect government is the wrong comparison compare real markets to real government real markets win every time

freedom is indivisible as soon as one begins to restrict it one enters upon a decline on which it is difficult to stop -Ludwig von Mises

statism is the real issue it’s so deeply ingrained in societal fabric that anyone who advocates for limited/abolition of government is seen as a loony nut socialism is just a facet of this disease

they praised hobbes and locke for the social contract theory the idea that power is vested in the people, given and taken by the people what they don’t realise is that “the people” doesn’t exist what exists rather is the acting individual “the people” collectivises acting individuals and actually only represents the majority let us assume you choose to “take” the power you supposedly give to those you elect tomorrow can you stop paying taxes? can you stop following their laws? they will jail or kill you the social contract involves implied consent the essence of a contract is that it is binding and signed by TWO parties therein lies the fallacious social contract theory just because some historical figures signed off on some constitution all of a sudden you are ruled by the majority, losing your property rights

patents are state enforced monopolies that infringe on physical property rights intellectual property rights don’t exist they are just restrictions on the free market, and hence, human development

@elonmusk The free market solution is always the best solution

Good analysis of rent control