20 Aug 2016

Tom Woods Takes Off Like a…

Tom Woods 16 Comments

Rocket! Listen to Tom in the feistiest interview I think I’ve ever heard him give. If he were Costanza, he’d say, “George is gettin’ very angry!!”

This was my favorite interview from Tom, except for the time he went on Dennis Miller’s show and set him straight on Paul Ryan. (In contrast, I would’ve been doing my Dana Carvey impressions hoping Miller would like me.)

16 Responses to “Tom Woods Takes Off Like a…”

  1. Bob Roddis says:

    I’m waiting for Tom Woods to turn into “Vox Day + AnCap”. There’s no uncontrolled immigration under AnCap, Vox.

    • LK says:

      “There’s no uncontrolled immigration under AnCap, Vox.”:

      “Laborers may also ask for geographical grants of oligopoly in the form of immigration restrictions. In the free market the inexorable trend is to equalize wage rates for the same value-productive work all over the earth. This trend is dependent on two modes of adjustment: businesses flocking from high-wage to low-wage areas, and workers flowing from low-wage to high-wage areas. Immigration restrictions are an attempt to gain restrictionist wage rates for the inhabitants of an area.”
      Rothbard’s Power and Market: Government and the Economy, p. 61.
      Bob does it again.

      • Bob Roddis says:

        Rothbard later changed his tune after talking to Hoppe. Rothbard was not thinking in terms of how an AnCap society might work with private roads or that private areas might impose “immigration restrictions” or that they could refuse to buy products from areas that did not uphold proper standards. Note how “Lord Keynes” just KNOWS a priori how people will behave upon the abolition of the initiation of violence and fraud. That anti-violence personality trait will also induce the very same people to import the equivalent of SLAVE LABOR! It’s pre-ordained!

        I was just remembering that my Leninist room mate used that very same “the poor will drive down wages” nonsense back in 1973. It’s what convinced me that the statists were shooting with blanks. If the poor in Africa were living under AnCap, they could be safe and prosperous too.

        I agree generally with the proposition that “In the free market the inexorable trend is to equalize wage rates for the same value-productive work all over the earth”. With everyone safe from violence and funny money and with the statists, socialists and Keynesians finally routed, everyone will tend towards the equalization of great prosperity.

        • LK says:

          “Rothbard later changed his tune after talking to Hoppe.”

          So we discover Rothbard was badly wrong on an important point.

          Ancapistan needs strong immigration and border controls if it is to avoid demographic and cultural suicide. Surprise, surprise. It’s almost as if — in its original form — Ancapistan was suicidal insanity.

          What else was it wrong on?

          • Bob Roddis says:

            There is no “original form” of AnCapistan. What goes on will depend upon the culture, values and plans of the population(s) depending upon the circumstances.

            Since you simply don’t it want it to exist just cuz, you can’t understand that or that there are numerous sanctions that might be applied to people or groups acting like jerks where their behavior does not amount to the initiation of force. Your crude and ignorant attacks presuppose an inevitable culture of people shooting each other for walking on lawns and lacking any sanctions for non-tortious and non-criminal behavior. For starters, encirclement seems like a pretty strong sanction to me.

        • LK says:

          But wait:

          “With no taxation, regulation, tariffs, or immigration quotas, the anarchist society would be of tremendous value to all major governments.”
          Murphy, Robert P. 2010. Chaos Theory: Two Essays on Market Anarchy (2nd edn.). Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Ala. p. 60
          Oh, damn it. I guess ol’ Bob didn’t get the memo from Hoppe.

      • Bob Roddis says:

        The M.O. of “Lord Keynes” is to quote Austrian and libertarian masters and then insist everything they wrote must be taken verbatim. However, one can logically derive for oneself the logical implications of AnCap and human action. If an implication follows from the axioms, it’s true whether or not Rothbard thought about it, wrote about it or agreed. Since “Lord Keynes” cannot and dares not think about those implications, anyone thinking for himself on these matters (me) becomes The Vulgar Internet Austrian.

        • LK says:

          “The M.O. of “Lord Keynes” is to quote Austrian and libertarian masters and then insist everything they wrote must be taken verbatim”

          Because, obviously, nothing Rothbard ever wrote can EVER be taken verbatim. I mean what kind of idiot would say what he means, dude?

      • Major.Freedom says:

        That is CONTROLLED immigration, LK.

        Controlled by the private property owners for their own lands.

        • Bob Roddis says:

          Lord Keynes keeps a large group of wise and informed commenters on his blog.

          1. Anarcho capitalism’ is a nonsensical and entirely fraudulent ideology.

          2. The idiocy of Bob Murphy’s ideas is so enormous that you wouldn’t be able to enumerate all the loopholes in one post.

          All his ideas are predicated on people being “nice” because they will face insurance problems otherwise.

          3. Those AnCap knuckleheads are truly amusing. I wonder why their state of mind isn’t recognized as a serious medical condition yet. They need help really.


  2. Bob Roddis says:

    I note that Vox Day’s “Prescription for Africa” does not include private property, sound money or an efficient justice system.


  3. Bob Roddis says:

    Under our current system of public roads, no one knows who or what is running about out there. Private roads could and would vet all visitors and their stuff. So, you want to bring a nuke on our road in your trunk? I don’t think so.

    Yes, private roads are the roads to chaos, collapse and criminals, unlike interstate 10 in Texas.


    • Matt M says:

      Not sure I follow here.

      Government roads theoretically “know” who and what is running about out there. You have to register both your car and yourself with the state to ensure that both are safe/qualified/etc. If either does something the state doesn’t approve of, they can revoke your privileges, and they have an enforcement mechanism to punish you if you still drive out there.

      I recently had this argument with a leftist friend of mine, but he took the “private roads couldn’t work because it would be so complicated” and I pointed out that it may be as simple as what we do now with the DMV (only better because it would be a privatized DMV). You are theorizing some sort of more advanced and thorough vetting system which *may* exist, but would not necessarily exist.

      • Bob Roddis says:

        I’m thinking of life near the U.S./Mexican border. Illegal immigrants, drug dealers, gang bangers. No one knows who is running around out there. Or what they possess.

        Then we have all the marvelous wonders induced by the drug war on the Mexican side of the border.


        I think life under AnCap would be slightly safer and secure since private property owners can keep out whomever they choose.

  4. Major.Freedom says:

    I understand Mr. Wood’s frustrations.

    Left wing thought policing and attacks on free speech.

  5. Bob Roddis says:

    Lord Keynes has made a nice cartoon emphasizing my point that anarcho-capitalism is a system where nuclear materials could be easily banned from private roads and where anyone thinking of dabbling in nukes could be cut off from access to anywhere and anything, including food and water if necessary.


    Deep thought: Under democracy, the majority could vote to nuke Canada just to be funny! They could vote to eat all minority children! And their moms! What a bunch of sickos!

Leave a Reply