Sunday, January 17, 2016

Capitalism and the Moral High Ground Craig Biddle | Economics, Individual Rights & Law, Philosophy

By Craig Biddle of The Objective Standard


Economists from Adam Smith to Ludwig von Mises to Henry Hazlitt to Thomas Sowell have elucidated the general mechanics of a free market and demonstrated the unassailable practicality of capitalism. They have shown how freer markets provide better and cheaper health care, cleaner air and water, safer automobiles and airplanes, ample food and energy, better and cheaper schools, and so on. But their arguments have not convinced the world to embrace capitalism. On the contrary, people today are condemning the system of private property as loudly as ever.According to Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA), Americans must abandon “this simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it.”1 Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA), addressing oil company CEOs, openly threatens to socialize their industry: “Guess what this liberal would be all about. This liberal will be about socializing. . . . all of your companies.”2 Philosopher Noam Chomsky insists that “putting people in charge of their own assets breaks down the solidarity that comes from doing something together, and diminishes the sense that people have responsibility for each other.”

Friday, January 8, 2016

Embarrassing Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry

It is often said that non-scientists must rely on “expert opinion” to
determine whether claims on alleged “catastrophic man-made global
warming” are true. Putting aside the fact that there is no
global-warming “consensus” among experts, one does not have to be a
scientist, or even proficient in science, to be able to review past
predictions, and then form an informed opinion regarding the accuracy of
those predictions.

 Embarrassing Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry

Embarrassing Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Why There’s No Such Thing as “Stealing American Jobs” | Michael J. Hurd, Ph.D. | Living Resources Center

Donald Trump and others have been accusing other countries of “stealing American jobs.”

Trump is half right. China is an authoritarian government that
manipulates its economy for the sake of power. Governments like this — i.e., most governments, throughout history — quality as thieves (and usually as murderers, too). Trump is also right that the U.S. federal government, under the Obama administration, has — for its own reasons of wishing to acquire more power and votes — refused to enforce existing immigration laws, thereby creating a crisis of illegal aliens now qualifying for billions in government assistance and programs.

Saturday, July 11, 2015

Today's Hot Men (071215)

"Pro-Life" Destroys All Rights

The problem with regarding unborn offspring as "persons" under law, and under a rational morality, is that then a conflict arises. To secure the alleged "rights" of the unborn, government must violate the rights of the individual adult human being, i.e. the pregnant mother. If we accept the notion that it is logically possible for inherent individual rights to conflict, we no longer have a basis for protecting all rights. In that case, in the case of conflict, the unborn can have no moral or legal claim to rights that the mother cannot claim for herself, or that anyone can claim. Without rights, society ceases to be civil, since there can be no limiting factor to government. We will have then legitimated absolute supreme power to governmental force.

On the other hand, if rights really don't conflict, which they logically cannot do, the mother's individual rights take precedence over those alleged "rights" possessed by the unborn offspring.

In short, the idea that unborn offspring can morally possess individual rights is a logical impossibility. Unborn offspring may be human beings, but they are not yet individual human beings, capable of exercising a will independent of other people. They are not yet "persons", nor should they be so considered.