Published by the Foundation for Economic Education
February 15, 2012 | Subscribe via RSS
Also in this issue
Politicians in Alabama and Georgia are cashing in on immigration fears to buy votes, but everyone pays, as Scott Beaulier, Darrick Luke and Daniel Smith explain. Robert Higgs asks if regime uncertainty explains the current malaise. Andrew Morriss marvels at how much better we live than Elvis did. Gary Chartier asks who’s really on the side of the poor and Robert Murphy says the Euro shows how little one can expect from a currency born entirely of government.
-
Libertarianism, from A to Z
Reviewed by Aeon J. Skoble
-
Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Sinking of the World Economy
Reviewed by Lawrence H. White
-
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism
Reviewed by George C. Leef
-
New Threats to Freedom: From Banning Ice Cream Trucks in Brooklyn to Abandoning Democracy Around the World
Reviewed by Wendy McElroy
-
Tough on Immigration Is Tough on Economic Growth
by Scott Beaulier
-
Going to Graceland
by Andrew P. Morriss
-
Government Is No Friend of the Poor
by Gary Chartier
-
Blowing Bubbles: Getting Ready for the Next Bust
by Richard W. Fulmer
-
State-Mandated Thinking
by Peter McAllister
-
The Euro: The Folly of Political Currency
by Robert P. Murphy
-
Taxi Regulation and the Failures of Progressivism
by Samuel R. Staley
-
Government the Job Killer
by John Stossel
-
Disaster Response Restores Confidence in Government?
by Tyler Watts
-
Regime Uncertainty, Then and Now
by Robert Higgs
-
Occupying Wall Street
by Sheldon Richman
-
Destroying Value
by Sheldon Richman
-
Employer Speech and Freedom of Association
by Charles W. Baird
-
Some Sins of Textbook Economics
by Donald J. Boudreaux
Free-Market T-Shirt
Show your support for liberty
with a tax deductible gift to FEE
© Copyright 2011 Freeman - Ideas on Liberty. All rights reserved.
Comment by Carl Clegg on 15 December 2008:
You push down in one place and it pops up somewhere else. The federal government should get out of the drug business and leave it up to the states. This includes the war on drugs as well as the promotion of drug abuse (free needle exchange programs).
Comment by Steve Hogan on 15 December 2008:
Carl,If the states really had the individual’s welfare in mind, they’d have to follow the fed’s lead and desist from the ridiculous and destructive drug war. Having agents of the state using their coercive powers to prevent people from ingesting substances others disapprove of is itself a criminal act.Once you follow the money and realize who benefits from the status quo, suddenly the reason the futile drug war persists decade after decade becomes clear.
Comment by Sean Hastings on 16 December 2008:
One of the things I find very interesting about current drug laws is the way they point to a creeping loss of our rights by ignoring and reinterpreting the Constitution rather than actually changing it through lawful amendment as was intended.Federal laws restricting the possession or use of alcohol were deemed unconstitutional before the ratification of the 18th amendment, and were immediately struck down as unconstitutional when the 21st amendment repealed prohibition. It was clearly understood during that time period that a constitutional amendment was required to give the Federal Government the power to legislate what substances people were allowed to put into their own bodies.But somehow, just a few decades later we have federal law again prohibiting the possession and use of certain substances, and for some reason, this time, no constitutional amendment is required.In fact, under current law, alcohol could again be prohibited without even the need for additional legislation (just some random bureaucrats putting it on a list of scheduled drugs) let alone the need for a constitutional amendment, were it not arbitrarily exempted (along with tobacco) from regulation under the Controlled Substances Act.