Brad Delong of the NY Times wrote an article in the economics section titled, "Tax luck, not thrift." He goes on to talk about the fairness of progressive taxation while recognizing current drawbacks about offshore tax shelters and toting the benefits of a substantial social insurance. You might think that in light of the long list of government failures more skepticism is warranted. However, Brad enjoys speaking in sophomoric generalities and assumes that services rendered by the state are both positive and desirable. He also ignores the implications of what he deems as lucky moves in the market.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
Unfortunately I was listening to the Sean Hannity show today and my head almost exploded. The big hoop la over the fast and furious scandal brought out all the race pimps shamelessly to make their voices heard. One particular caller could not even comprehend the possibility that the GOP was not racist because they raised some noise about an attorney general's involvement in arming criminal gangs. I am not a Republican, but how ridiculously has the political discourse fallen when many common folks start arguments with conclusions fed to them through their brain tubes?
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
I just finished watching Tom Woods guest hosting the Peter Shchiff radio show talk to the founder of a private arbitration company judge.me, Peter-Jan Celis. Celis explains the benefits of using this service as an alternative to the expensive and time consuming process of public courts. The site also claims that its philosophy of "ex aequo et bono" ensures there is no legal mumbo jumbo. This is explained in the following way: "which means our arbitrators act 'from equity and conscience'. Without legal loopholes to exploit, there is no need to hire an expensive lawyer."
The current system of justice has so many inherent bad incentives it is no wonder the average person feels like they can't get justice in a court room. Judges, cops, and lawyers are all on the paying end of a monopolized protection racket. Judges justify the tickets the cops give out. Lawyers collect a hefty fee for the incredible skill of "navigating" the millions of laws on your behalf. No one can represent you except a lawyer approved by the government after several years of re education anyway. Cops provide fresh leads for the lawyers. It's just a big cesspit of corruption.
The judge.me solutions sounds like a great way to reduce the time and resources needed to resolve the average small claims disputes. This is a private company who doesn't have a monopoly. So if they lose their stellar reputation for being quick, efficient, and just then they lose their clients. This is the perfect free market check on justice that our society needs.
Could anyone even imagine how to go about getting a judge fired for being corrupt? I guess we could ask our lawyer to help get rid of the system which ensures his steady flow of clients. I guess we could ask the police to help get rid of the system which ensures they have a constant flow of
It just fills me with joy to see someone striving to provide free market alternatives to closed market monopolies. I'm sure everyone can see the benefits of having control over how their contracts are enforced. And probably the best aspect of all about a private solution such as this is that there is no gun involved in the transaction! Imagine trading with people with no guns to your head. Well perhaps it is difficult for us to imagine at present, but I have faith in the new generation of liberty lovers to bring us into the new age of freedom.
If you find this topic intriguing please don't stop reading about the subject. Many economists and philosophers explain in great detail the fundamental principles of private law and its advantages over the public system. To learn more about the academic intricacies of this type of court system, I would recommend watching Hans Hermann Hoppe on youtube, State or Private Law Society. You can also always just Google, "Private Law."