If you haven’t browsed through Despair.com, it is worth a look, especially the hilarious lithographs. I particularly like this one, which they interestingly recommend for Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, Libertarians and Austrian economists:

A couple more:


If you haven’t browsed through Despair.com, it is worth a look, especially the hilarious lithographs. I particularly like this one, which they interestingly recommend for Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, Libertarians and Austrian economists:

A couple more:


Nassim Nicholas Taleb has a great podcast with Russ Roberts of Econtalk. I am posting the link to the most recent one as well as another one from 2007 that is worth listening to.
Taleb on the Financial Crisis 2009 Podcast
Taleb on Black Swans 2007 Podcast
And if you would like more, here is Taleb’s homepage and a video of him speaking on the financial crisis.
Interestingly, black swans were first found here in Australia, and I think of Taleb every time I see one (and Popper). Also check out Taleb’s book, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable.
Most libertarians agree public schooling is a form of slavery and morally evil. In addition to this moral argument, the utilitarian case against public schooling is a strong one. While many libertarians and social theorists have written on this, Ivan Illich should not be missed. I recently came across his works and found great insight in the following article: “Why We Must Abolish Schooling.” It is no wonder he was referred to in the Libertarian Forum so much.
I just wanted to highlight some great quotes from the article. (I am guessing his excellently-titled book, Deschooling Society (Open Forum), will come out from the Mises Institute at some point.)
This is a long quote (below), but very insightful. I have thought for a while about the socially negative effects that stem from education. But Mr. Illich points out how the process vs. substance outcome has led to such effects. This is in every aspect of where taxpayer’s money is spent. I think this is where the real value of an economist comes into play, or perhaps when the economist as social or political theorist is so useful. Pointing out the economic and social effects of bad ideas and policies–especially where this requires seeing the unseen cause and effect relationships, and some creativity–separates the better from the best economists imho.
Many students, especially those who are poor, intuitively know what the schools do for them. They school them to confuse process and substance. Once these become blurred, a new logic is assumed: the more treatment there is the better are the results; or, escalation leads to success. The pupil is thereby “schooled” to confuse teaching with learning, grade advancement with education, a diploma with competence, and fluency with the ability to say something new. His imagination is “schooled” to accept service in place of value. Medical treatment is mistaken for health care, social work for the improvement of community life, police protection for safety, military poise for national security, the rat race for productive work. Health, learning, dignity, independence, and creative endeavor are defined as little more than the performance of the institutions which claim to serve these ends, and their improvement is made to depend on allocating more resources to the management of hospitals, schools, and other agencies in question. Not only education but social reality itself has become “schooled.”
I maintain the belief that it is a widespread myth that government helps the poor in any significant way, at least when compared to a free society. Mr. Illich wrote about this modernization or institutionalization of poverty with great clarity:
Welfare bureaucracies claim a professional, political, and financial monopoly over the social imagination, setting standards of what is valuable and what is feasible. This monopoly is at the root of the modernization of poverty. Every simple need to which an institutional answer is found permits the invention of a new class of poor and a new definition of poverty.
The more I read this article the more amazed I am at Mr. Illich’s profound insights. Most people think poverty comes from a lack of money. In contrast Mr. Illich wrote:
The poor in the US are in a unique position to speak about the predicament which threatens all the poor in a modernizing world. They are making the discovery that no amount of dollars can remove the inherent destructiveness of welfare institutions, once the professional hierarchies of these institutions have convinced society that their ministrations are morally necessary. The poor in the US inner city can demonstrate from their own experience the fallacy on which social legislation in a “schooled” society is built.
What about the social effects of public schooling?
Obligatory schooling inevitably polarizes a society; it also grades the nations of the world according to an international caste system. Countries are rated like castes whose educational dignity is determined by the average years of schooling of its citizens, a rating which is closely related to per capita gross national product, and much more painful.
And the economic effects?
The escalation of the schools is as destructive as the escalation of weapons but less visibly so. Everywhere in the world school costs have risen faster than enrollments and faster than GNP; everywhere expenditures on school fall even further behind the expectations of parents, teachers, and pupils. Everywhere this situation discourages both the motivation and the financing for large-scale planning for non-schooled learning. The US is proving to the world that no country can be rich enough to afford a school system that meets the demands this same system creates simply by existing: because a successful school system schools parents and pupils to the supreme value of a larger school system, the cost of which increases disproportionately as higher grades are in demand and become scarce.
Again, I highly recommend checking out Mr. Illich’s works, most of which seem to be available here. Finally, this will be the last quote:
Rather than calling equal schooling temporarily unfeasible we must recognize that it is, in principle, economically absurd, and that to attempt it is intellectually emasculating, socially polarizing, and destructive of the credibility of the political system which promotes it.
For those (especially libertarians) who have not seen the Australian satirical comedy The Hollowmen, you are missing out. These clips will hopefully entice you to watch more. I imagine they are not far off from what goes on in Canberra, DC, London or anywhere else. The remarks about the obesity problem being a good thing (first video) and the girl wishing for a bomb blast (second video) are so true. The State always needs bogeymen to grow. Any crisis will do, e.g., obesity, terror threat, credit crunch, swine flu, ad infinitum.
After listening to Peter Schiff at the Austrian Scholars Conference for an hour and a half, did I listen to his lengthy Google presentation? Absolutely.
I have been meaning to write about this for a while now. My daughter attends public school, which I aim to have her out of this year so she can be home-schooled (we’ll see). Anyhow, over dinner conversations I ask her about her day and what she learned. She usually says she went to the library, played on the computer, read, or made something. Recently she said she did “Sustainability.” My wife, who knew about this, hesitated to tell me because she knew what my reaction would be.
Now I absolutely loathe public schooling, both for its dumbing down of above-average students and making below-average students feel incompetent, and for its slave-like relationship, forcing children to be separated from their families for 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week. However, I can somewhat understand a desire for kids to learn what I thought the State was supposed to be teaching, i.e., the three R’s: reading, writing, and arithmetic. Now it seems to be anything but.
How does the State justify teaching anything, much less “Sustainability”?
From the LRC blog comes this great clip from The Americanization of Emily. Are there movies like this nowadays?
I have been listening to lectures titled “Thinking about Capitalism” from The Teaching Company. There are 36 lectures and they are very good so far. I just listened to one on religious tolerance and Voltaire, whom I had never studied but found extremely fascinating. He has some very well-known quotes (e.g., “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”) but it is only when he is placed in the European Enlightment context that he really shines and becomes more courageous. He went against many religious authorities and leaders when he advocated economic self-interest and the accumulation of wealth. He viewed religious zealots and enthusiasts as sources of discord, contrasted with the market that brought about peaceful trade–regardless of the religious background of the traders. He viewed the market as a way to spread tolerance and not conflict. His quotes and insights are simply superb. This is one of my favorites:
“Go into the Exchange in London, that place more venerable than many a court, and you will see representatives of all the nations assembled there for the profit of mankind. There the Jew, the Mahometan, and the Christian deal with one another as if they were of the same religion, and reserve the name of infidel for those who go bankrupt.”
There are many audios that have been added on Mises.org lately from the 1990s. They have been harder to find amidst all of the ASC lectures (including mine). I was listening to this one yesterday by George Koether, who knew Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard. It was pretty good but I especially liked the part where he talked about books that Mises recommended reading. He said whenever Mises would recommend books at his seminars he would go out and buy them. The first one Mises recommended was Introduction to Logic by Irving M. Copi and Carl Cohen, now in its 13th edition!
I was extremely excited because I checked that book out from the library a few months ago after researching books on logic. It is an excellent book. Now I need my own copy to highlight and mark up. Just to give you an idea of its brilliance, the first page of the book (literally, the preface) starts off with this quote by Thomas Jefferson:
In a republican nation, whose citizens are to be led by reason and persuasion and not by force, the art of reasoning becomes of the first importance.
This is the book Mises recommended everyone should read first. Mr. Koether also discussed Keynes’s library, which he said was full of mathematics books, with very few on economics. This also reveals the difference in methods employed by Austrians vs. Keynesians (and most others).