WalterBlock.com

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/nice-letter-about-defending-the-undefendable/

To: [email protected]

Subject: question.

Dear Professor Block,

I hope this note finds you doing well with the start of another semester. I wanted to write you and let you know that I have appreciated reading your work over the years. Defending the Undefendable is one of my favorite books that I have ever read! I will keep this brief as you must be busy. Is it possible to send you my copy to be signed by you? I would include a postage paid envelope. If so, is there a certain address I should send it to? Thank you for your time.

Warm regards,

Adrian

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: question.

Dear Adrian:

Sure. Send it. I’ll return it, signed. May I ask, where do you live, how old are you?

Since you liked Defending I so much, you might also like the two follow up volumes, with a completely new cast of characters:

Block, Walter E. 2013. Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in all realms; Mises Institute, Auburn AL; Terra Libertas Publishing House; isbn: 978-1-908089-37-3; http://store.mises.org/Defending-the-Undefendable-2-P10932.aspx; http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379098357&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+in+all+realms; http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380679730&sr=1-2; isbn: 9781908089373; http://terralibertas.com/products/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcover; http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/robert-wenzel/top-book-picks-of-2013/; http://www.amazon.co.uk/Defending-Undefendable-II-Freedom-Realms/dp/1908089377/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387741833&sr=1-1&keywords=Defending+the+Undefendable+II%3A+Freedom+in+All+Realms; http://www.librarialibertas.com/economie/defending-the-undefendable-ii-freedom-in-all-realms-hardcover.html; http://mises.org/daily/6624/Walter-Block-Is-Still-Defending-the-Undefendable; http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/mark-thornton/still-defending-the-undefendable/; http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae17_1_6.pdf;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/1908089377; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/6I1PKZ08/defending-II-paperback.pdf;

file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/MP32C5LH/DTUIIFreedomInAllRealmMS20111107.pdf

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-%E2%80%94-audiobook;

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable;

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-2-0;

Spanish translation: https://www.editorialinnisfree.com/product-page/defendiendo-lo-indefendible-ii-walter-block

https://mises.org/library/defending-undefendable-2-audiobook

Soundcloud here: https://soundcloud.com/misesmedia/sets/defending-the-undefendable-ii

and ApplePodcast here https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/defending-the-undefendable-ii/id1555138708

Block, Walter E. 2021.  Defending the Undefendable III. Springer Publishing Company; https://www.amazon.com/Defending-Undefendable-III-Walter-Block/dp/9811639566/ref=sr_1_24?dchild=1&keywords=libertarianism&qid=1623439836&s=books&sr=1-24; https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9; ISBN: 978-981-16-3957-9; for book reviewers: https://www.springer.com/gp/reviewers

To purchase: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9;

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Defending-the-Undefendable-III-by-Walter-E-Block/9789811639562?utm_source=service_email&utm_campaign=order_confirm&utm_medium=email&utm_content=books;

https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Defending-the-Undefendable-III-by-Walter-E-Block/9789811639562;

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Springer.com%20%7C%20US%20%7C%20Microsoft%20%7C%20Research%20%7C%20CPM%20%7C%20Shopping&utm_term=4584070140123873&utm_content=All%20eBooks; https://www.springer.com/gp/instructors/textbook-copy-request-us/17556774;

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-16-3957-9; ISBN: 978-981-16-3956-2

This book uniquely deals with hard cases of libertarianism. Beneficial specifically to readers interested in law, economics, politics and philosophy. Covers a wide range of examples of socio-cultural and economic various backgrounds

Best regards,

Walter

3:18 pm on October 6, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/long-discussion-with-a-brilliant-high-school-student/

(Read from the bottom up; I thought he was a professor!)

Dear Amos:

I feel a compulsion to convert the heathen. I’ve already published on most of these issues, so here goes:

1. Abortion is murder and never justified:

30. Block, Walter E. 2021. Evictionism: The compromise solution to the pro-life pro-choice debate controversy. Springer Publishing Company.

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-981-16-5014-7;

For reviewers: https://www.springer.com/gp/reviewers; https://www.springer.com/gp/instructors/textbook-copy-request-us/17556774;

https://smc-link.s4hana.ondemand.com/eu/data-buffer/sap/public/cuan/link/100/C2AA39A530336AC2B82AE9F4BCD463ABDE73A280/pixel.gif?_L54AD1F204_=c2NlbmFyaW89TUxPUEVOJnRlbmFudD1teTMwNDQyNC5zNGhhbmEub25kZW1hbmQuY29t;

https://dam.springernature.com/preview/8qkJz6AE4NVAo0r_q1x9IT/previews/maxWidth_600.png?&authcred=YXBpX2V4dGVybjpndWVzdA;

<https://smc-link.s4hana.ondemand.com/eu/data-buffer/sap/public/cuan/link/100/C2AA39A530336AC2B82AE9F4BCD463ABDE73A280?_V_=2&_K11_=479FAFAD58110FE1BC920C170EC676450FAD8B67&_L54AD1F204_=c2NlbmFyaW89TUxDUEcmdGVuYW50PW15MzA0NDI0LnM0aGFuYS5vbmRlbWFuZC5jb20mdGFyZ2V0PWh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc3ByaW5nZXIuY29tP3NhcC1vdXRib3VuZC1pZD1DMkFBMzlBNTMwMzM2QUMyQjgyQUU5RjRCQ0Q0NjNBQkRFNzNBMjgw&_K13_=251&_K14_=8f04f66beb2626ad9394eacc16811b448131ace07eb93e987cff8b495fe74f45>;

https://dam.springernature.com/preview/8qkJz6AE4NVAo0r_q1x9IT/previews/maxWidth_600.png?&authcred=YXBpX2V4dGVybjpndWVzdA; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/HK3CWM0N/Block%20Evictionism%20The%20compromise%20solution%20to%20the%20pro-life%20pro-choice%20debate%20controversy%20(Walter%20E.%20Block)%20(z-lib.org).pdf; https://b-ok.cc/book/18608872/f7d2ac;

A unique perspective to the pro-life, pro-choice debate. Explores themes of property rights in relation to human life and rights. Offers a balanced debate on the topic of human rights.

Evicitionism- The compromise solution to the pro-life pro-choice debate controversy__.pdf

file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/0AGF02JT/__Evicitionism-%20The%20compromise%20solution%20to%20the%20pro-life%20pro-choice%20debate%20controversy__.pdf

2.Private eduction funding should be as high as people agree upon. Public education funding should be zero.

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Mandatory Student Fees: Forcing Some to Pay for the Free Speech of Others,” Whittier Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 759-781; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mfearningdifferentials.htm; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mandatoryfees.htm

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2000. “Direct Payment of State Scholarship Funds to Church-Related Colleges Offends the Constitution and Title VI,” Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 191-207; http://tinyurl.com/2dwelf; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/directpymt.htm;

http://www.academia.edu/1466695/Direct_Payment_of_State_Scholarship_Funds_to_Church-Related_Colleges_Offends_the_Constitution_and_Title_VI;

Young, Andrew and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Enterprising Education: Doing Away with the Public School System,” International Journal of Value Based Management, Vol.12, No. 3, pp. 195-207; http://www.mises.org/etexts/enterprisingedu.pdf; http://www.mises.org/story/2216; https://walterblocks.com/publications/enterprising_education.pdf; http://www.mises.org/story/2216; https://mises.org/library/enterprising-education-doing-away-public-school-system?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=b769abd2e7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-b769abd2e7-227976965

3.Pollution. Here’s the best thing ever written on that subject:

Rothbard, Murray N. 1982. “Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution,” Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring; reprinted in Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, Walter E. Block, ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1990, pp. 233-279. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/lawproperty.pdf; http://mises.org/story/2120

Here are some other good readings:

Block, 1994, 1998, 2009, 2011, 2012; DiLorenzo, 1990; Gordon, 2021; Horwitz, 1977; Lewin, 1982; McGee and Block, 1994; Rockwell, 2000; Rothbard, 1982

Block, Walter E. 1994. “Pollution,” Cliches of Politics, Mark Spengler, ed., Irvington on Hudson, New York: Foundation for Economic Education, pp. 267-270

Block, Walter E. 1998. “Environmentalism and Economic Freedom: The Case for Private Property Rights,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 6, December, pp. 1887-1899; http://www.mises.org/etexts/environfreedom.pdf;

http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/environmentalism.htm; Romanian translation: www.antiteze.com; http://mises.org/Etexts/Environfreedom.Pdf

Block, Walter E. 2009. “Contra Watermelons.” Ethics, Place & Environment, Vol. 12, Issue 3, October, pp. 305 – 308; http://mises.org/daily/4209; http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a916452684&fulltext=713240928

Block, Walter E. 2011. “Ron Paul and the Environment.” December 13;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block189.html

Block, Walter E. 2012. “Global Warming, Air Pollution and Libertarianism.” January 18;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block195.html

DiLorenzo, Thomas. 1990. “Does Capitalism Cause Pollution?,” St. Louis, Washington University: Center for the Study of American Business, Contemporary Issues Series 38.

Gordon, David. 2021. “Can Taxation Be Justified?” August 13;

https://mises.org/library/can-taxation-be-justified

Horwitz, Morton J. 1977. The Transformation of American Law: 1780-1860, Cambridge: Harvard University Press

Lewin, Peter.  1982. “Pollution Externalities: Social Cost and Strict Liability.”  Cato Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, Spring, pp. 205-229.

McGee, Robert W. and Walter E. Block. 1994. “Pollution Trading Permits as a Form of Market Socialism and the Search for a Real Market Solution to Environmental Pollution,” Fordham University Law and Environmental Journal, Vol. VI, No. 1, Fall, pp. 51-77; https://walterblocks.com/publications/pollution_trading_permits.pdf. Translated into Russian, and published in № 3б, 2007 of “Ekonomicheskaya Politika” (Economic Policy) Journal; http://tinyurl.com/263787; http://141.164.133.3/exchange/walterblock/Inbox/Fwd:.EML/1_multipart_xF8FF_2_m%D1%81gee-block.pdf/C58EA28C-18C0-4a97-9AF2-036E93DDAFB3/m%D1%81gee-block.pdf?attach=1; https://walterblocks.com/translations.php;

http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1374&context=elr

Rockwell, Jr. Llewellyn. 2000.  “The Enviro-Skeptic’s Manifesto.” May 1;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/anti-enviro.html

Rothbard, Murray N. 1982. “Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution,” Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, Spring; reprinted in Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, Walter E. Block, ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1990, pp. 233-279. http://www.mises.org/rothbard/lawproperty.pdf; http://mises.org/story/2120

Block, Walter E. 1998. “Environmentalism and Economic Freedom: The Case for Private Property Rights,” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 6, December, pp. 1887-1899; http://www.mises.org/etexts/environfreedom.pdf;

4. Statues:

I want to have statues of Hitler and Stalin on my private property (to throw eggs at, or, to pray to). What justification do you offer to compel me to take down these statues? Or to do so over my objections?

There shouldn’t be any statues on govt streets or highways since they should all be privatized:

Block, Walter E. 2009. The Privatization of Roads and Highways: Human and Economic Factors; Auburn, AL: The Mises Institute; https://store.mises.org/Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Human-and-Economic-Factors-The-P581.aspx; http://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Roads-And-Highways-Factors/dp/1279887303/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336605800&sr=1-1; available for free here: http://mises.org/books/roads_web.pdf; http://mises.org/daily/3416; https://walterblocks.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/radical_privatization.pdf; audio: http://store.mises.org/Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Audiobook-P11005.aspx; http://www.audible.com/pd/Business/The-Privatization-of-Roads-and-Highways-Audiobook/B0167IT18K?tag=misesinsti-20; http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=bf16b152ccc444bdbbcc229e4&id=6cbc90577b&e=54244ea97d;

http://www.sanfranciscoreviewofbooks.com/2017/09/book-review-privatization-of-roads-and.html

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

You can kidnap me, but I don’t think my head would look good in a blanket. Find something else.

My mistaken political views: I guess they’re a bit of a mix-up. I’m mainly focused on philosophy of religion, but when I think about politics I try to take it issue by issue. Maybe when I’m old enough to be a boomer I’ll look back and try to sort them into an ideological grouping. I don’t have many political views, but here are some things I do believe:

(1)      I’m agnostic about whether abortion is homicide, but I would ban it out of moral risk. This is caveated by the standard exemption (life of the mother), but also by the abortion method: abortions done by way of blocking implantation should not be banned, even if the foetus is a person with a right to life. (I explain why in a paper I wrote, but that’s currently under review).

(2)      Higher education funding should be cut to the barest minimum. (Possibly even less). This is quite libertarian of me.

(3)      Carbon should be taxed to mitigate climate change. Other government interventions might work, but I’m not sure what those are.

(4)      Statues of people who committed serious rights violations should be taken down. If the government refuses to take them down, it can be permissible for protestors to vandalise them.

I have other views, but they are largely unexamined and only tacitly held. (The other day I realised that I though MMT was a bad thing, even though I only barely know what it is and haven’t read anything by its defenders.)

No doubts you’ll have lots of thoughts about all of this. Resist the temptation to write a second dissertation in response. You need your sleep.

Best wishes,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Yes, we do have a similar sense of humor.

If someone throws a blanket over you head, kidnaps you and brings you to New Orleans, and compels you to enroll at Loyola, it’ll be me. I’ll be working on how I can reconcile this with libertarianism.

What are your present (e.g., mistaken) political views?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 5:12 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

I’m sure it will be. I’m not a libertarian at the moment – not even the wussy kind – but I’m open to being persuaded of a political philosophy, even *sighs deeply* yours. That said, I look forward to forcing you to renounce your entire life’s work.

Only joking of course,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Go easy on me, please! I’m an old man! My age is the inverse of your 18!

On a more serious note, it will be a pleasure to debate these issues with you, and convert you into a radical deontological libertarian, instead of your present wussy libertarianism!

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Walter:

Whew! Just finished reading. That was one helluva piece. Compliments gratefully received.

Don’t feel horrid – you have nothing to be sorry about. If you can’t handle the heat, get out of the kitchen. I think we have a pretty similar sense of humour; the chippiness is part of the fun.

I’ll try to get my response typed up and submitted as soon as I can.

Best wishes,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Whoa. Wow. You sure fooled me. May I ask how old are you?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Hi Walter:

Thanks. Yes, that should be fine 🙂

Not a professor anywhere! Just got out of secondary school, and will be a first year undergrad at Oxford in about a month.

Best,

Amos.

From: Walter Block

To: Amos Wollen

Subject: RE: Conjoined twins

Dear Amos:

Here’s an attachment, not a shareable link. I hope and trust that will suffice.

May I ask where are you a professor at?

Best regards,

Walter

From: Amos

To: [email protected]

Subject: Conjoined twins

Hi Walter! Amos here. Just saw your response to my article on the Philosophia website. Unfortunately, I don’t have institutional access – would you mind sending me the shareable link?

Looking forward to reading,

Amos.

3:17 pm on October 6, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

To: ‘David

Subject: RE: Hoppe and children

Dear David:

But poor people wouldn’t be allowed to have kids. For they could not post bonds to forfeit if their kids misbehaved. They could not reliably promise to make good for their kids future misdeeds. Isn’t that a good reductio?

Poor people, then, wouldn’t be able to invite foreigners, immigrants, onto their holdings.

Best regards,

Walter

From: David

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 7:08 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Hoppe and children

On Hoppe’s argument, you can still have children. You just have to be responsible for any costs they impose on others. When they grow up you can either continue to be responsible for them or send them out of the country, whichever you prefer.

On 7/24/22 3:21 PM, Walter Block wrote:

Dear David:

No, he has not replied to this argument, to the best of my knowledge. But he’s not the only one who is vulnerable to his reductio, of course.

However, not only does this apply to being responsible for the bad deeds of foreign invitees, or being respoinsible for children’s misdeeds, it also applies to having children in the first place. They are all “immigrants” from the country “storkovia.” If you think children come from pregnancy, you’re wrong. They come from the country storkovia, and are brought here by storks! So, if you oppose open immigration, you should, logically, oppose “open” births. The government should limit the number of kids that are born. Yay, China and it’s one child policy, in this view.

I wrote about this “stork” reductio here:

Block, Walter E. 2016B. “A response to the libertarian critics of open-borders libertarianism,” Lincoln Memorial University Law Review; Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 142-165; http://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/lmulrev/vol4/iss1/6/;

http://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1071&context=lmulrev

Block, Walter E. 2011A. “Hoppe, Kinsella and Rothbard II on Immigration: A Critique.” Journal of Libertarian Studies; Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 593–623; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_29.pdf

Best regards,

Walter

From: David

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 1:50 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Hoppe and children

I am adding to my chapter on immigration your point that Hoppe’s argument applies to newborn children of present residents as well as to immigrants. If he is consistent, he should propose that parents be responsible for any costs imposed by their adult children and, if they are not willing to be, the children should be exiled.

Has he ever responded to that argument?

—

David

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 2:22 PM

To: ‘David

Subject: RE: Hoppe and children

Dear David:

No, he has not replied to this argument, to the best of my knowledge. But he’s not the only one who is vulnerable to his reductio, of course.

However, not only does this apply to being responsible for the bad deeds of foreign invitees, or being respoinsible for children’s misdeeds, it also applies to having children in the first place. They are all “immigrants” from the country “storkovia.” If you think children come from pregnancy, you’re wrong. They come from the country storkovia, and are brought here by storks! So, if you oppose open immigration, you should, logically, oppose “open” births. The government should limit the number of kids that are born. Yay, China and it’s one child policy, in this view.

Best regards,

Walter

3:14 pm on October 6, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 1:10 PM Flenser wrote:

Hi Walter,

I have a growing interest in Austrian economics and libertarianism, and because I believe you’re the world leader on these topics, I’d very appreciate it if you can help me with the following questions (actually I have lots of questions, but these are the most pressing ones I have at the moment):

1. If FRB is fraud, isn’t insurance in general a fraud? Just like banks, insurance companies cannot pay all of their clients in case all of them, or a large portion of them, lay a claim at the same time.

2. If banks were to add 1 simple clause in their contract with you: Your checking deposit is redeemable only if we have sufficient reserves to satisfy your claim – would then FRB be non-fraudulent? (and I claim that the current condition in real life is very similar to this, as almost everyone is aware of that proviso).

3. Regarding cardinal utility: If I’m willing to pay max 6 bucks for a hat and only max 3 bucks for a pen, why doesn’t it mean I value the hat twice as much as the pen? And hence I derive twice as many utils from it?

Also, it makes no sense to deny that life saving medicine doesn’t give a lot, lot more utility than, say, a can of coke. Even if it’s not accurately quantifiable, it seems hard to deny that cardinal utility is real.

4. Punishment in libertarian law – Rothbard has the “2 tooth” argument. But doesn’t it fail in cases where the criminal act has a very low chance of being detected? Say I steal 100$ from you and there’s only a 1 in a million chance I get caught – it’ll still pay me to keep robbing everyone if the max punishment is just “2 teeth” (200$ more or less?)

Thanks a lot and I wish you Chag Sameach,

Dan

Dear Dan:

See below for my responses.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Flenser

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Questions about Austrian economics

Hi Walter,

I have a growing interest in Austrian economics and libertarianism, and because I believe you’re the world leader on these topics, I’d very appreciate it if you can help me with the following questions (actually I have lots of questions, but these are the most pressing ones I have at the moment):

1. If FRB is fraud, isn’t insurance in general a fraud? Just like banks, insurance companies cannot pay all of their clients in case all of them, or a large portion of them, lay a claim at the same time.

<<< the frb banks have an instantaneous debt greater than their assets. This is not true for the insurance firms. They have no debt at all yet, since the calamity didn’t yet occur.

2. If banks were to add 1 simple clause in their contract with you: Your checking deposit is redeemable only if we have sufficient reserves to satisfy your claim – would then FRB be non-fraudulent? (and I claim that the current condition in real life is very similar to this, as almost everyone is aware of that proviso).

<<< yes, that would be fine. But this would turn the demand deposit into a frb time deposit, which no Rothbardian such as I looks upon as fraudulent

3. Regarding cardinal utility: If I’m willing to pay max 6 bucks for a hat and only max 3 bucks for a pen, why doesn’t it mean I value the hat twice as much as the pen? And hence I derive twice as many utils from it?

<<< there aint no such thing as a util, a unit of happiness. “I’m now happy at the rate of 7.6 utils” is a meaningless statement.

Also, it makes no sense to deny that life saving medicine doesn’t give a lot, lot more utility than, say, a can of coke. Even if it’s not accurately quantifiable, it seems hard to deny that cardinal utility is real.

<<< Austrians support ordinal, not cardinal, utility. I have no trouble saying “life saving medicine is preferrable to a can of coke.” That’s not meaningless

4. Punishment in libertarian law – Rothbard has the “2 tooth” argument. But doesn’t it fail in cases where the criminal act has a very low chance of being detected? Say I steal 100$ from you and there’s only a 1 in a million chance I get caught – it’ll still pay me to keep robbing everyone if the max punishment is just “2 teeth” (200$ more or less?)

<<< the libertarian view is 2 teeth for a tooth, plus costs of capture, plus a penalty for scaring. That is VERY draconian. See on this:

Block, 2009A, 2009B, 2016, 2018; Gordon, 2020; Kinsella, 1996, 1997; Loo and Block, 2017-2018; Olson, 1979; Rothbard, 1977, 1998; Whitehead and Block, 2003

Block, Walter E. 2009A. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf;

http://mises.org/books/property_freedom_society_kinsella.pdf; festschrift

Block, Walter E. 2009B. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/

Block, Walter E. 2016. “Russian Roulette: Rejoinder to Robins.” Acta Economica et Turistica. Vol. 1, No. 2, May, pp.  197-205; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309300488_Russian_Roulette_Rejoinder_to_Robins; file:///C:/Users/walterblock/Downloads/AET_2_Block_6.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2018. “The case for punishing those responsible for minimum wage laws, rent control and protectionist tariffs.”  Revista Jurídica Cesumar – Mestrado, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 235-263; http://periodicos.unicesumar.edu.br/index.php/revjuridica/article/view/6392; http://periodicos.unicesumar.edu.br/index.php/revjuridica/article/view/6392/3190

Gordon, David. 2020. “Rothbard and Double Restitution.” September 4;

https://mises.org/wire/rothbard-and-double-restitution?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=ccce2acf8d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-ccce2acf8d-227976965

Loo, Andy and Walter E. Block. 2017-2018. “Threats against third parties: a libertarian analysis.” Baku State University Law Review; Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 52-64; http://lr.bsulawss.org/archive/volume4/issue1/; http://lr.bsulawss.org/archive/volume4/issue1/block/; http://lr.bsulawss.org/files/archive/volume4/issue1/4BSULawRev13.pdf?

Kinsella, Stephen. 1996. “Punishment and Proportionality: the Estoppel Approach,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring, pp. 51-74; http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/12_1/12_1_3.pdf

Kinsella, Stephan. 1997. “A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights,” 30 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 607-45

Olson, Charles B. 1979. “Law in Anarchy.” Libertarian Forum. Vol. XII, No. 6, November-December, p. 4; http://64.233.167.104/u/Mises?q=cache:gFT18_ZusWoJ:www.mises.org/journals/lf/1979/1979_11-12.pdf+two+teeth+for+a+tooth&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Rothbard, Murray N. 1977. “Punishment and Proportionality.”  R. E. Barnett and J. Hagel, III (eds.), Assessing the Criminal: Restitution, Retribution, and the Legal Process.  Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co., pp. 259 270.

Rothbard, Murray N. 1998. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press. https://cdn.mises.org/The%20Ethics%20of%20Liberty%2020191108.pdf;

In the view of Rothbard (1998, p. 88, ft. 6): “It should be evident that our theory of proportional punishment—that people may be punished by losing their rights to the extent that they have invaded the rights of others—is frankly a retributive theory of punishment, a ‘tooth (or two teeth) for a tooth’ theory. Retribution is in bad repute among philosophers, who generally dismiss the concept quickly as ‘primitive’ or ‘barbaric’ and then race on to a discussion of the two other major theories of punishment: deterrence and rehabilitation. But simply to dismiss a concept as ‘barbaric’ can hardly suffice; after all, it is possible that in this case, the ‘barbarians’ hit on a concept that was superior to the more modern creeds.”

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2003. “Taking the assets of the criminal to compensate victims of violence: a legal and philosophical approach,” Wayne State University Law School Journal of Law in Society Vol. 5, No. 1, Fall, pp.229-254

Thanks a lot and I wish you Chag Sameach,

Dan

3:12 pm on October 6, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/advice-to-a-young-economics-professor/

From: J

Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2022 6:21 AM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: asking for an advice

Dear Professor Block,

I have one question for you as a more experienced colleague: my University is starting an Economics Major program and for the first time this Fall I will be teaching Intermediate Microeconomics. I am torn between doing what I think they should be learning (“Man, Economy and State” by Sensei) and what might be opportune for them to learn (standard stuff, probably Varian textbook). Any advice?

J

From: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2022 10:51 AM

To:  J

Subject: RE: asking for an advice

Dear J:

Do the Varian type text. Why?

1.you won’t get in trouble

2.the Rothbard will be unfair to your students who go on to grad school. There, Varian, not Rothbard, will help them

But, in addition to the Varian as your main text, also include several Rothbard, Mises, etc., shorter essays. Also, you don’t have to cover ALL of your main text. Three quarters will do just fine.

Best regards,

Walter

2:38 am on July 28, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

Ron Unz is one of the good guys. No, scratch that: one of the very, very, very good guys. However, his position on the minimum wage law is highly problematic.

Dear Ron:

You are truly a mensch. Very few people in your position would have published our essay, given that it is a frontal attack on your position. My co author and I are very grateful to you for that.

How shall we proceed? Shall you write a rejoinder to what you have just published of ours, and invite us to respond? Or, shall we respond to this material you just sent us beginning with the words: “Finally, the CBO conclusions seem to totally demolish…” If you have published other material on the min wage, perhaps you could send it to us (if it would take less than 2 minutes of your time) and we could respond to that, also. I think the best way to get to the truth of this matter, any matter at all for that matter, is via this sort of back and forth dialogue. Perhaps such a debate might also be of interest to your readership.

I rereading what we wrote, I regret that material about your “genius.” That was impolite and uncalled for. We promise not to do that sort of thing any more. Thanks for putting up with us despite that.

Best regards,

Walter

From: Ron Unz

Sent: Monday, June 27, 2022 9:10 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Thanks, Walter.  Since your piece so directly challenges my own position, I think it’s only fair that I run it, and it’s now up in the Economics section:

https://www.unz.com/article/ron-unz-on-the-minimum-wage-law/

However, I really do think that there’s actually very strong evidence that monopsony effects have artificially depressed wages at the lower end.

As you might remember, during the 2014 battle over raising the minimum wage, the CBO came out with a report suggesting that the proposed $10.10 MW would probably lead to the loss of 500,000 jobs, a conclusion that was hailed and widely cited by the anti-MW camp.  A CBO analysis last year exploring a variety of different MW increases found roughly similar conclusions.  But here are a few paragraphs from a column I published at the time:

Finally, the CBO conclusions seem to totally demolish one of the central economic dogmas presented by ideological opponents of minimum wage laws.

Rigidly doctrinaire libertarians argue that minimum wage laws serve no valid purpose since our free market in labor ensures that employers must pay all workers their true economic value, no more and no less. Thus, they say that if a worker earns $8.50 per hour, that is the approximate value of the labor he produces and his job would disappear at any higher required wage. By contrast, economists who support a minimum wage suggest that low-wage businesses benefit from their “monopsony” position in the labor market, and regularly use that great market power to pay workers less than their true value, much like a monopolist can unreasonably bid up the price of his products.

This obscure technical dispute is central to the theoretical basis for minimum wage laws, and I would argue that the CBO figures decisively resolves this question. According to the CBO, some 98% of those low-wage workers impacted by a 40% hike in the minimum wage would keep their jobs at a much higher rate of pay, thereby demonstrating that their economic value to their employer was vastly greater than their current rate of pay, which had been artificially reduced due to their lack of effective bargaining power. When 98% of workers are paid below their true economic value, any assumptions of a truly efficient market in labor are absurd, and the rectifying impact of a higher minimum wage becomes absolutely justified.

Thus, on both theoretical and practical grounds, the CBO report demonstrated the exact opposite of what the contending parties in the minimum wage debate seemed to suggest. Perhaps journalists will eventually begin reporting this more correct interpretation of the stated facts.

https://www.unz.com/runz/understanding-the-cbo-analysis-of-a-minimum-wage-hike/

Best,

Ron

Dear Ron:

Please consider publishing the op ed that appears below. My coauthor and I are big fans of yours. We consider your efforts monumental in behalf of promoting liberty. But not on this one issue. We hope and trust you take this in the spirit we mean it: an attempt to convince a hero of ours of a mistake on this one issue.

As always, this is exclusive to you. If you publish this, please let me know. If I don’t hear from you on this within a week, I’ll assume you won’t be using it, and I’ll be free to send it elsewhere.

Best regards,

Walter

Ron Unz on the Minimum Wage Law (923 words)

By Walter E. Block and Frank Tipler

Ron Unz fits Winston Churchill’s famous description: he is “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.”  Unz has an IQ of 214. His views are for the most part conservative, even libertarian; certainly, he is an otherwise supporter of the free enterprise system. And, yet, he supports the minimum wage law.

Did this genius come up with some new twist or wrinkle that the rest of us had somehow missed? Not a bit of it. His “reasoning” is pretty much the same old tired economic balderdash offered by all other supporters of this monstrous and pernicious law:

“Once I started investigating the details it really seemed like the facts were on the other side—especially since so much of the economy has shifted from manufacturing to other industries. You can always relocate manufacturing jobs. You can’t ship McDonald’s jobs to India or Bangladesh.”

Let us try to educate this genius regarding what economics 101 has to say about a minimum wage. To start with, what determines wages in the absence of any law? Why do employers want to hire employees in the first place? Employers hire based upon a new hire’s expected productivity (actually, discounted marginal revenue product, but that is a matter for an intermediate microeconomics course). And what is this productivity? It is the amount by which having a worker on the premises will boost the company’s bottom line.

If staff person Smith increases profits by $10 hourly, that will tend to be his wage. It cannot permanently be higher than that, or the firm will lose money on this hire, and, if it persists in the folly of hiring him, it will court bankruptcy. Nor can Smith’s wage be lastingly lower than that amount. For suppose that Smith is now being paid $7 per hour. Some other company will benefit by offering him $7.01, and then another $7.02. This bidding process will tend to rise to an even $10, assuming no transaction, sorting or information costs, which disappear in the long run.

With a minimum wage of $12, Smith is no longer welcome on the shop floor or asking anyone if they “want fries with that?” Anyone hiring him will now lose $2 per hour. Smith is now unemployable, Mr. Unz to the contrary notwithstanding.

But we have to be careful about this. In 1949, the minimum wage was raised from $.40 to $.75, almost a doubling. At that time elevators were run manually. How many operators of this machinery lost their jobs the very next day? None, not a single one. Many people who should have known better thus thought this law beneficial. But over the next few months automatic elevators replaced all humans. Automatic elevators were not competitive with manual labor at the old rate, but were at the new higher one. Indeed, as Unz says, one cannot ship a MacDonald’s job to India.  But one can automate the job out of existence.  This, seemingly, has never occurred to Mr. Unz.

If a minimum wage is justified, how does one determine at what level it should be implemented? No answer has ever been given to this basis question. That is, no minimum wage law is based on first principles.

If there is no justified upper bound to the minimum wage, why not require a minimum wage of one kilogram of gold per hour?   It is estimated that only 250,000 metric tons, or 250,000,000 kilograms, of gold has ever been mined.  At a wage of 1 kilogram of gold per hour, after two hours, USA employers would owe their workers more gold than has ever been mined in the totality of human history.

Isn’t it obvious that this is nonsense? Sure, we can all favor a minimum wage of $1 million per hour. Then, we’d all be rich. No, make that $1 quadrillion per hour.

But what about monopsony or oligopsony? This would indeed place an upper bound on the minimum wage; mainstream economists who believe in this fallacious doctrine tend to place it at something like $12 – $25 hour. However, this only applies, if it applies at all, to highly skilled jobs that have only one (monopsony) or only a few (oligopsony) potential employers: professional athletes, actors, highly specialized lawyers, doctors, nerds, etc. It is entirely irrelevant to minimum wage workers.

There is of course one other explanation for Unz’s position. He really hates unskilled workers and wants them to have miserable, unemployed lives. Then, we can all admit, he is very intelligent. Evil, but highly gifted.

Walter E. Block is Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and Professor of Economics at Loyola University New Orleans

Frank Tipler is a Professor of Mathematical Physics at Tulane University

Pegs:

This stopped being convincing to Unz, who made his fortune by designing software that allowed mortgages to be chopped up into securities, and whose IQ has clocked in at 214. “Once I started investigating the details,” he says, “it really seemed like the facts were on the other side—especially since so much of the economy has shifted from manufacturing to other industries. You can always relocate manufacturing jobs. You can’t ship McDonald’s jobs to India or Bangladesh.”

Source:  https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/01/ron-unz-the-california-libertarian-multimillionaire-is-pushing-a-minimum-wage-hike.html

In 1949, the minimum wage was raised from 40 cents an hour to 75 cents an hour for all workers and minimum wage coverage was expanded to include workers in the air transport industry.

https://www.google.com/search?q=in+what+year+was+the+minimum+wage+raised+from+40+to+75+cents%3F&oq=in+what+year+was+the+minimum+wage+raised+from+40+to+75+cents%3F&aqs=chrome..69i57.20470j1j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

2:37 am on July 28, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/how-should-a-libertarian-deal-with-the-governments-policy-on-covid/

From: Brandon
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 9:55 PM
To: Walter Block <[email protected]>
Subject:

Dear Professor Block,

This is less of a professional email concerning Austrian Economics or Libertarianism and more concerning personal matters that I have no one else to go to for. I’m absolutely terrified that the state is gonna reimpose COVID-19 restrictions. This was something I never thought I’d have to worry about again, but recently, there has been a surge in cases caused by the BA.5 COVID strain, which has a very high transmissibility and reinfection rate, though doesn’t pose the threat of serious illness. Nevertheless, I’ve heard that the CDC is already advising several counties in Tennessee to mask up and San Diego is already planning on imposing mask mandates. I feel as if the past few months of relative freedom are coming to a close and the state is ready to renew its absolute control over the population. For the past four days, I’ve found myself in a very dark place, absolutely horrified of the prospect of going back to masking and social distancing. I can still remember suffering daily from March of 2020 to November of 2021, sometimes sitting in the corner of my room and either sobbing or silently huddling in agony. I don’t wanna go back. I don’t wanna suffer again. I just don’t know what to do. On the bright side, I live in Florida, but I feel that even my state will somehow end up imposing restrictions. I’m sorry if this is personal, but I have absolutely no one to go to and I’m wondering whether my fears are warranted.

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Brandon

Dear Brandon:

Here is what I’ve published on this topic. I hope and trust it will give you a small modicum of comfort:

Block, Walter E. 2020. “A libertarian analysis of the Covid-19 pandemic.” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1; https://jls.scholasticahq.com/article/17836-a-libertarian-analysis-of-the-covid-19-pandemic?auth_token=1jZ-UoctwxQnkYZLFJZR;

https://mises.org/library/libertarian-analysis-covid-19-pandemic

Block, Walter E. 2022. “Covid: Punishing the Unvaccinated.” May 1;

https://www.thepostil.com/covid-punishing-the-unvaccinated/

November 18, 2020 The economics of lockdown or Anti-covid measures versus freedoms (the hottest topic for everyone). The welfare state. Market Failure.

Protectionism. Economic inequalities. Alexandru Butiseacă [email protected]

https://www.facebook.com/academeya/videos/181933693555046/ (We had 2.5 K views at this event – Academeya Foundation of which you are an honorary member).

Here is the link to online TV:

https://viacluj.tv/profesorul-walter-block-la-via-cluj-tv-ne-confruntam-cu-interventionismul-pandemic/?fbclid=IwAR3y4u7eyjRt4O7jDHRHCWTxwzmY7Rm9JeV3gc369hq1A4TnhHVt8ZpaNVs; file:///C:/Users/WBlock/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/RJV545UF/Aparitii%20media%20online%20conferinta%20The%20Pandemic%20Interventionism.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Quarantines.” March 10;

https://www.targetliberty.com/2020/03/walter-block-on-quarantines-because-of.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TargetLiberty+(Target+Liberty);

https://www.targetliberty.com/2020/03/walter-block-on-quarantines-because-of.html?fbclid=IwAR2eKAqVI1zJ-2d-aCW6IQwwJQQKRWJf_lcJsDxLHp9RIfNx-1fYuMzUrO8

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Coronavirus Maximus: a thought experiment on forced quarantine.” May 19; https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/coronavirus-maximus-a-thought-experiment-on-forced-quarantine/

April 13, 2020. Debate on the Coronavirus Quarantine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWEjU6ejEQE. the post-debate correspondence: https://xoandelugo.org/post-debate-correspondence-between-walter-block-philipp-bagus-and-bernardo-ferrero-on-the-ethics-of-the-coronavirus-quarantine/?fbclid=IwAR1ZUOlXvdeDPDC53PdJ9ZeoQn-6SYvbNIpUv2xalgRY3a2xQ8hFHn1b35A;

Block, Walter E. 2020. “Vaccinations, Part II.” May 13;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/vaccinations-part-ii/

Block, Walter E. 2013. “Forced Vaccinations.” February 4;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block217.html; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/02/walter-e-block/forced-vaccinations/

Iglesias, David and Walter E. Block. 2021. “COVID-19 Lockdowns: The Unseen Costs” Libertas: Segunda Epoca; Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 1-11; https://journallibertas.com/files/Online%20First/LIBERTAS%20-%20Iglesias%20and%20Block.pdf; https://journallibertas.com/articulos/online_first/; https://journallibertas.com/files/2021/6.2%20-%2003%20-%20Iglesias%20-%20Covid-19%20lockdowns.pdf; https://journallibertas.com/articulos/2021/;

Best regards,

Walter

2:36 am on July 28, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/is-it-compatible-with-libertarianism-to-work-for-the-state/

From: Brandon

Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 3:33 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Another personal matter

Dear Professor Block,

I have another personal matter. This time, it relates to a moral dilemma as a libertarian. My mother and grandma are pressuring me to take a paid job as a poll worker for my local county. This concerns me, as I feel it is clearly unethical to accept money that my local government has confiscated through property taxation. However, I don’t want to disappoint either my mother or my grandmother, as I love them deeply. This has placed me in quite a dilemma. My mom insists that this will make me look good in my resume and give me a start in politics. What do you think?

Yours truly,

Brandon

Dear Brandon:

I have no idea as to whether doing so will help your political career.

However, I have strong feelings that doing so will NOT violate any libertarian principles.

You walk on govt sidewalks, right? You drive on govt roads, right? I previously taught at a public university. Are either of us acting incompatibly with libertarian principles? Not at all. For more on this, read these:

Is it ok for libertarians to avail themselves of government money::

Block, 1972, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009A, 2009B, 2010, 2011A, 2011B, 2011C, 2011D, 2012, 2016, 2018A, 2018B; Block and Arakaky, 2008, Block and Barnett, 2008, D’Amico and Block, 2007; Gress and Block, 2020.

Block, Walter E. 1972. “The Polish Ham Question.” The Libertarian Forum. June-July, Vol. 4, No. 6-7, p. 5; http://www.mises.org/journals/lf/1972/1972_06-07.pdf; http://mises.org/daily/4054; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block143.html

Block, Walter E. 2002. “Accepting Government Subsidies,” Fraser Forum, February, p. 27; http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/forum/2002/02/section_13.html

Block, Walter E. 2004. “Radical Libertarianism: Applying Libertarian Principles to Dealing with the Unjust Government, Part I” Reason Papers, Vol. 27, Fall, pp. 117-133;

https://walterblocks.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2006. “Radical Libertarianism: Applying Libertarian Principles to Dealing with the Unjust Government, Part II” Reason Papers, Vol. 28, Spring, pp. 85-109; https://walterblocks.com/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf; https://walterblocks.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf; http://www.reasonpapers.com/pdf/28/rp_28_7.pdf; (death penalty justified, net taxpayer, ruling class analysis p. 87)

Block, Walter E. 2007. “Ron Paul and Matching Funds,” October 1;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block86.html

Block, Walter E. 2008. “Replies to readers” September 23;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block108.html (libertarians hypocrites for using public school?)

Block, Walter E. 2009A. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/

Block, Walter E. 2009B. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2010. “You are a rotten kid (rent control and libertarianism),” February 27;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block150.html

Block, Walter E. 2011A. “It’s Ayn Rand Bashing Time, Once Again.” February 18; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block172.html

Block, Walter E. 2011B. “May a Libertarian Take Money From the Government?” March 11; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block175.html; https://www.lewrockwell.com/2011/03/walter-e-block/may-a-libertarian-take-money-from-the-government/

Block, Walter E. 2011C. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 22; pp. 665-675; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_33.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2011D. “Hoppe, Kinsella and Rothbard II on Immigration: A Critique.” Journal of Libertarian Studies; Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 593–623; http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_29.pdf

Block, Walter E. 2012. Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty. Ishi Press; http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871873234;

http://www.amazon.com/Paul-President-2012-Liberty-ebook/dp/B0085IEQB8/; http://www.dailypaul.com/232336/new-book-on-ron-paul-by-walter-block;

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0085IEQB8#reader_4871873234; http://search.barnesandnoble.com/books/product.aspx?ISBN=4871873234;

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012-walter-block/1110505571?ean=9784871873239;

http://jfrp.org/2012/05/10/just-released-walter-blocks-new-book-on-ron-paul/?preview=true&preview_id=73&preview_nonce=242eff3860;

http://runronpaul.com/economy/why-do-economists-say-that-ron-paul-would-be-the-best-president-for-the-economy/; http://bastiat.mises.org/2012/06/defending-the-defendable/;

http://www.libertarianbookclub.com/2012/06/02/4750/;

http://www.loyno.edu/news/laag/20120601/3729?utm_source=LAAG&utm_medium=enews&utm_content=20120601&utm_campaign=PublicAffairs;

http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871873234/ref=as_li_ss_til?tag=lewrockwell&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=4871873234&adid=022PCECJPWPJ8DJNW8YP;

Block, Walter E. 2016. “Is It Compatible With Libertarianism to be a Banker? Yes!” September 29; https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/compatible-libertarianism-banker-yes/

Block, Walter E. 2018A. “Ragnar Danneskjold.” LRC Blog, Nov. 6, 2018.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/ragnar-danneskjold-2/.

Block, Walter E. 2018B. “Reconciling Liberating Property from the Unjust

Government and Reparations for Stolen Property in the Past.”

LRC Blog, Nov. 8, 2018. https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/

reconciling-liberating-property-from-the-unjust-government-andreparations-for-stolen-property-in-the-past/.

Block, Walter E. and Chris Arakaky. 2008. “Taking Government Money for Grad School?” May 23; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block100.html

Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2008. “Continuums” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics, Vol. 1, pp. 151-166 June; http://www2.units.it/~etica/; http://www2.units.it/~etica/2008_1/BLOCKBARNETT.pdf

D’Amico, Dan and Walter E. Block. 2007. “A Legal and Economic Analysis of Graffiti” Humanomics Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 29-38; http://www.mises.org/journals/scholar/damico.pdf; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContainer.do?containerType=Issue&containerId=24713; http://ssrn.com/abstract=1008525; file:///C:/Users/Walter/Downloads/SSRN-id1008525.pdf

Gress, Jonathan and Walter E. Block. 2020. “The Ethics of Public Spending.” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 434–444;

https://cdn.mises.org/jls_24_2_gress_block.pdf

This book of mine might be of interest to you:

Block, Walter E. 2012. Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty. Ishi Press; http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871873234;

http://www.amazon.com/Paul-President-2012-Liberty-ebook/dp/B0085IEQB8/; http://www.dailypaul.com/232336/new-book-on-ron-paul-by-walter-block;

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0085IEQB8#reader_4871873234; http://search.barnesandnoble.com/books/product.aspx?ISBN=4871873234;

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ron-paul-for-president-in-2012-walter-block/1110505571?ean=9784871873239;

http://jfrp.org/2012/05/10/just-released-walter-blocks-new-book-on-ron-paul/?preview=true&preview_id=73&preview_nonce=242eff3860;

http://runronpaul.com/economy/why-do-economists-say-that-ron-paul-would-be-the-best-president-for-the-economy/; http://bastiat.mises.org/2012/06/defending-the-defendable/;

http://www.libertarianbookclub.com/2012/06/02/4750/;

http://www.loyno.edu/news/laag/20120601/3729?utm_source=LAAG&utm_medium=enews&utm_content=20120601&utm_campaign=PublicAffairs;

http://www.amazon.com/dp/4871873234/ref=as_li_ss_til?tag=lewrockwell&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=4871873234&adid=022PCECJPWPJ8DJNW8YP;

Here is Ron Paul’s blurb, which appears on the back cover of this book: “Walter E. Block is one of the top writers and scholars in the liberty movement. It is an honor to have Walter as a friend and supporter.”

Amazon:  $25.95; Kindle: $9.99

Best regards,

Walter

2:35 am on July 28, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us:

From: David

Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2022 12:23 PM

To: Walter Block <[email protected]>

Subject: Question about educational regulations

Dear Walter:

I hope you´re well. At this moment I´m developing a research on costs for private schools.

In my country, although private education is allowed, it is highly regulated. In fact, schools are classified into three freedom regimes: “regulated freedom”, “monitored freedom” and “controlled regime”. A real madness…

Based on this classification, the national Department of Education authorizes maximum percentages for the increase in tuition. For example, the regulated freedom regime, which is the most “beneficial”, allows schools to increase their prices by up to 5%.

My idea is to propose dismantling these maximum percentages, as well as those three “freedom regimes”, but of course I must make a solid theoretical defense, for which I am consulting the opinion of various experts in the economics of education, like you, with respect to this issue.

How should it be justified that private schools make their charges without taking into account maximum authorized limits?

Thanks a lot for your comments.

Best regards,

David

Dear David:

I think the best way to pursue this is to go basic: attack public education at its very roots. Without public education, there is only private education. Then, with its virtues more clear, the case for regulating it will be lessened. I think the best way to do that is to attack this book:

Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago: University of Chicago Press

That is, chapter 6, the one on education.

I’ve written a bit on this subject; some of these publications may be of help to you:

Barnett and Block, 2008; Block, 1991A, 1991B, 1991C, 1992, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2014; Block and Cwik, 2007; Block and Dauterive, 2007; Four Arrows and Walter Block, 2010; Goolsby and Block. 2003-2004; Horton and Block, 2001-2002; McGee and Block, 1991; North and Block, 2011; Reel and Block, 2012, 2013; Rome and Block. 2006; Seaman and Block, 2019; Whitehead, and Block. 1999, 2000; Young and Block. 1999;

Barnett, William II and Walter E. Block. 2008. “Economic categorization.” Laissez-Faire, Issue 28-29, March-September, pp. 4-12; http://fce.ufm.edu/Publicaciones/LaissezFaire/

Block, Walter E. 1991A. Dollars and Sense: “School Vouchers,” January 18; Nelson Daily News;

Block, Walter E. 1991B. “School Vouchers,” Fraser Forum, February, pp. 30-31.

Block, Walter E. 1991C. “School’s Out for Educational Socialism,” British Columbia Report, v. 2, n. 26, February 25, p. 4.

Block, Walter E. 1991. “Educational Socialism,” Fraser Forum, April, pp. 30-31

Block, Walter E. 1992. “Political Correctness, Free Speech and Economic Liberty,” Fraser Forum, March, p. 38.

Block, Walter E. 2007. “My Case of and for Coauthoring,” Dialogue, pp. 93-116; http://www.uni-svishtov.bg/dialog/2007/3.07.WB.pdf; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228196683_My_Case_of_and_for_Co-Authoring?ev=prf_pub

Block, Walter E. 2008. “Attention Students: Should You Get Your Ph.D. and Become a Professor?” June 28; http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block104.html (debate with Gary North) http://archive.lewrockwell.com/block/block104.html

Block, Walter E. 2010. “Is there a Ph.D. glut in economics in academia?” Romanian Economic and Business Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 9-26; http://tinyurl.com/yd6qwsd; reprint in Economics, Management, and Financial Markets , forthcoming, 2010, Vol. 5, No. 1; http://loyno.academia.edu/WalterBlock/Papers/1325023/Is_There_a_Ph.D._Glut_in_Economics_in_Academia; Password: AddletonAP2009.

Block, Walter E. 2014. “Is econ 101 killing America? A critique of Atkinson and Lind, and Boettke.” Management Education Science Technology Journal (MEST); Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 10-22. doi:10.12709/mest.02.02.02.02; http://www.mest.meste.org/MEST_2_2014/4_02.pdf

Block, Walter E. and Paul Cwik. 2007. “Teaching Business Ethics: A Classificationist Approach,” Business Ethics: A European Review.  Vol. 16, No. 2 April, pp. 98-107; http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/toc/beer/16/2.

Block, Walter E. and Jerry Dauterive. 2007. “Political Correctness and the Economics of Higher Education.” Humanomics. Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 230-239; http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=A4474341C26657A036E9A278B2379E63?contentType=Article&contentId=1637489

Four Arrows and Walter E. Block. 2010. Differing Worldviews: Two Scholars Argue Cooperatively about Justice Education; Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers; http://www.amazon.ca/Differing-Worldviews-Higher-Education-Arrows/dp/9460913504/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336603241&sr=1-6; [email protected]; [email protected]

Goolsby, Jerry R. and Walter E. Block. 2003-2004. “Education and Bureaucracy: National Testing and School Privatization,” Texas Education Review; http://www.educationreview.homestead.com/2003GoolsbyBlock.html;

http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Articles%20for%20web/National%20Testing%20and%20School%20Privatization.doc

Horton, Marshall and Walter E. Block. 2001-2002. “Was Marx an Adjunct?  An Analysis of the Proposition That Part-time Faculty Are Economically Exploited,” Texas Education Review, Vol. 1, No. IV, Winter, pp. 43-46; https://walterblocks.com/publications/marx_an_adjunct.pdf

McGee, Robert W. and Walter E. Block. 1991. “Academic Tenure: A Law and Economics Analysis,” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Vol. 14, No. 2, Spring, pp. 545-563; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/academictenure.htm; reprinted as McGee, Robert W. and Walter E. Block. “Academic Tenure: An Economic Critique,” in DeGeorge, Richard T., ed., 1997. Academic Freedom And Tenure: Ethical Issues, Rowman & Littlefield, 1997

North, Gary and Walter E. Block. July 24-30, 2011 Auburn, AL, Mises University; Debate on higher education; http://mises.org/events/110;

http://media.mises.org/mp3/MU2011/10_MisesU_20110726_Block.mp3;

http://media.mises.org/mp3/MU2011/27_MisesU_20110727_Block.mp3;

http://media.mises.org/mp3/MU2011/16_MisesU_20110726_Block-North_Debate.mp3;

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/93031.html; http://www.garynorth.com/public/9121.cfm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwWoY3OuBYA

Reel, Jordan and Walter E. Block. 2012. “Public Education: Who is it for?” The Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies; Vol. 7, No. 4, October, pp. 66-72; http://www.revistainternationala.com/index.php?lang=es;

http://paper.researchbib.com/?action=viewPaperSearch

Reel, Jordan and Walter E. Block. 2013. “Educational Vouchers: Freedom to Choose?” Contemporary Economics. pp. 111-122, December, DOI:10.5709/ce.1897-9254.126 http://we.vizja.pl/en/home; http://ce.vizja.pl/en/issues/volume/7/issue/4#art328.

Rome, Gregory and Walter E. Block. 2006. “Schoolhouse Socialism.” Journal of Instructional Psychology, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 83-88; http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCG/is_1_33/ai_n16118909/?tag=content;col1; reprinted as “Voucher Programs Lead to Government Interference in Private Schools,” in Young, Mitchell, ed. 2012. For-Profit Education, Detroit: Gale, Cengage Learning, pp. 169-176

Seaman, Matthew and Walter E. Block. 2019. “Fahrenheit 451 and the Education System.” Political Dialogues: Journal of Political Theory; Vol. 27, pp. 55-62; https://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/DP/issue/view/1815;

https://apcz.umk.pl/czasopisma/index.php/DP/article/view/DP.2019.010

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Mandatory Student Fees: Forcing Some to Pay for the Free Speech of Others,” Whittier Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 759-781; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mfearningdifferentials.htm; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/mandatoryfees.htm

Whitehead, Roy and Walter E. Block. 2000. “Direct Payment of State Scholarship Funds to Church-Related Colleges Offends the Constitution and Title VI,” Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 191-207; http://tinyurl.com/2dwelf; http://141.164.133.3/faculty/Block/Blockarticles/directpymt.htm;

http://www.academia.edu/1466695/Direct_Payment_of_State_Scholarship_Funds_to_Church-Related_Colleges_Offends_the_Constitution_and_Title_VI;

Young, Andrew and Walter E. Block. 1999. “Enterprising Education: Doing Away with the Public School System,” International Journal of Value Based Management, Vol.12, No. 3, pp. 195-207; http://www.mises.org/etexts/enterprisingedu.pdf; http://www.mises.org/story/2216; https://walterblocks.com/publications/enterprising_education.pdf; http://www.mises.org/story/2216; https://mises.org/library/enterprising-education-doing-away-public-school-system?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=b769abd2e7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-b769abd2e7-227976965

Best regards,

Walter

2:33 am on July 28, 2022

The Best of Walter E. Block

Please follow and like us: