08 Jun 2011

Murphy on FreedomWatch

Economics, Financial Economics, Shameless Self-Promotion 7 Comments

I toyed with the idea of telling the Judge that actually, they jacked up income tax rates to ridiculous levels pretty soon after they were implemented–the top rate was 77% in 1918–but I wasn’t sure how to get the proper tone across so I played it safe.

7 Responses to “Murphy on FreedomWatch”

  1. Michael Suede says:

    “Robert, what should the government do differently?”

    Why didn’t you just say it should dissolve itself?

    It’s like asking – “Robert, what should a criminal mafia organisation do differently in order to run more efficiently and bring prosperity to the economy?”

    Do you see any difference between either of those two questions?

    The Judge put you on a national network news show. You have an obligation to denounce the State for what it is.

    • bobmurphy says:

      You and Gene Callahan should coordinate your attacks on my public strategy. Neither of you is happy with me, but you’re giving conflicting advice.

    • Major_Freedom says:

      To be fair, the question presumes that the government exists, because in order for the government to do anything, there has to be a government. If the government is abolished, then it can’t do anything.

      So Murphy did answer the question, he just did so knowing that the ideal is for the crime syndicate to be abolished.

      If he was asked the question: “Dr. Murphy, should the US government be abolished?” then if answered anything but yes, then you could fairly criticize.

    • Centinel says:

      I’m not an anarchist, but still, to answer: “abolish government” doesn’t add value, IMO. Given the state that government exists, the answer was correct and relevant. It wasn’t a question of whether government should exist or not, but given the state affairs, what should government do. For anarchist’s to say abolish government for every answer doesn’t, IMO, advance their cause. Rothbard, at least in later years, didn’t play the “abolish government “game; he, instead, came up with ways to reduce government, given the state of affairs: see Making Economic Sense.

      • Michael Suede says:

        The way to abolish the State is to create a currency that is impossible for the State to control.

        Enter Bitcoins:

        I am fairly confident that Bitcoins will bring about an end to the State.

        • MamMoTh says:

          Highly unlikely it would become a widespread currency, so forget about it bringing an end to the State.

          An interesting economic and technological experiment though. A few remarks:

          – Bitcoins come into existence through deficit spending
          – Bitcoins are just numbers that get marked up or down
          – You can’t pay taxes with Bitcoins

  2. Senyor says:

    What is Gene upset about? Is he upset with your style or content? Is he upset with the way you present your ideas or just with the fact that you are still a libertarian?