Murray Rothbard: The Decline of Laissez-Faire (American Economy Lecture #3)
Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money
http://Mises.org The late great Murray Rothbard gave a series of lectures in 1986 at New York Polytechnic University entitled "The American Economy and the End of Laissez-Faire: 1870 to World War II." Fortunately for us, they were recorded by Hans Hermann-Hoppe. This third lecture is entitled "The Decline of Laissez-Faire." Audio for the entire lecture series can be found here: http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=217
Comments
-
R.I.P. MURRAY!
-
a pod of whales..
-
It's not the ron paul revolution its your rothbardian revolution
-
A majority of society are very dense meaning that in accordance with demographics: one can draw the logical conclusion that the ratio is 20/80 in favor of stupidity. The famous economist Vilfredo Pareto came up with the Pareto Principle which states that you can think of something as being an 80/20 ratio or 90/10 or 95/5, etc...What is interesting about the ration is it shows that a majority of people in the world are dumb. Hence by that statement it allows for a person to know new information.
-
I agree. However you may want to expand that to include GLOBAL stupidity. Americans, as fucking dense as we are, haven't cornered the market on stupid just yet. It's not like as soon as you leave the US you enter this great bastion of enlightenment. Europe is not what it used to be my friend and the far east is slowly succumbing to the mass-idiot consumer mentality pervading the globe as we speak, throwing away 1000's of yrs of wisdom. It's a race to the bottom my friend.
-
Murray Rothbard was a great economist, and he exposed the superstition of Statism.
-
@pretorious700 LOL
-
@Muthsera80 Hey there, I appreciate you exposing me to David Harvey. I do think that Harvy's points, and Rothbards, lay criticism on the same state empowered oligopolies, and the tendency for this 'elite' group to use state monopoly on violence and force to systematically pull property (or cumulative time/value) and time from the majority. They are on the same side, but explain their critiques of elitist through different lenses; Rothbard through libertarianism, and Harvey through Marxism.
-
@Muthsera80 Provide evidence or don't bother replying.
-
im and objectivist what specifically do you have a problem with when talking to them?
-
One thing for sure. You have to keep on your toes to understand Mr. Rothbard. Once you catch on, you will glean some great nuggets.
-
@truevoice08 don't know if you're aware, I sent you a PM about how we can do a chat, if you want to go on
-
@Sam26100 Well sorry if I insulted you. I developed a very bad impression of objectivists from personal interactions with them. It's like talking to a wall. What a waste of time! But if you are different then I'm sorry. How shall we chat?
-
@truevoice08 If you want to actually have a discussion rather than this post-based bickering, I invite you to do a live chat or a voice chat if you prefer. PM me if you're interested
-
@truevoice08 No, a voluntary funded government is NOT the same as Anarcho-Capitalism /sigh The level of insults you're throwing at me is a confession of your own blindness I hope you realize that much at least. I didn't say you were a dogmatist, but just because I disagree with you doesn't make me one either. There are heaps of articles written by Objectivists which adress this point of contestation between AC, and Obj. Have you read any of them?
-
@Sam26100 cont.... Rand even when everybody else calls a system with no initiation of force as anarchy. Again you prove your blind dogmatism.
-
@Sam26100 Explain to you why there would be law in anarchy? I think a more important question is why we need INITIATION of violence for there to be law. Why we need an organization to violate natural law for there to be law? Please enlighten me, after all, you are a follower of the source of all truths, Ayatollah Rand. But wait a minute, you don't believe in taxation, don't you? You still refuse to call your system anarchism even if it's logically the same. You are too ARROGANT to deviate from..
-
@truevoice08 Well then if you're so smart and I'm so retarded, I'm sure it would be easy for you to educate me no? after all I know when I am smarter about a subject than somebody else I find compelled to show them the error of their ways. Explain to me how there would be law in an anarchy. /listens closely
-
@truevoice08 I'm willing rejecting the truth? you're just throwing insults trying to troll me, I've listened to over 200 podcasts from freedomain radio. Would I have done that If I didn't want to explore ideas other than Objectivism? Explain how there would be law in an anarchy, Stefan Molyneux couldn't do it, but maybe you can
-
@Sam26100 Hah! Just as I expected from a randroid. You equate lawlessness with anarchism. You reject it by misunderstanding it. It's shocking to me how you still reject it after so many vehicles for education like FreedomainRadio. Maybe your WILLINGLY rejecting the truth to hold on to that decrepit religion of Objectivism??? This is why I label objectivists as 'rational retards'.
0m 0sLenght
129Rating