Everyone, in his own interests, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle. - Ludwig von Mises | ✉️ subscription below | IG: misesinstitute

Auburn, Alabama
Joined January 2008
Mises Institute retweeted
Advocates of sound money have long said, "if you don't hold it, you don't own it." Among debt concerns, bond market jitters, and general geopolitical tension, central bankers across the globe are finally seeing the wisdom in the advice.
BREAKING: Central banks around the world are quietly stockpiling four times as much gold as usual and are moving it out of the US, per FORTUNE
5
1
22
1,373
Mises Institute retweeted
I'm very honored - and surprised - to receive the Koether Award for my Entrepreneurship and Evolutionary Economics. 🙏
16
13
123
2,614
In this week's Friday Philosophy, Dr. David Gordon reviews The Meaning of Socialism by Michael Luntley. While acknowledging that Luntley has some good insights, overall, he find the work lacking a full understanding of socialism. mises.org/friday-philosophy/…
1
2
18
1,753
Congratulations to @PerBylund, the recipient of the 2026 George F. Koether Free-Market Writing Award for his book Entrepreneurship and Evolutionary Economics.
5
12
92
2,593
Mises Institute retweeted
Alex Pollock on "What the Fed Can and Cannot Do" at the Mises Supporters Summit 2026.
2
7
1,362
Mises Institute retweeted
Stay tuned. Happening soon.
4
12
4
123
3,972
🤔
“The AIs will always be leftist because they are trained on leftist material” is something I hear commonly, but @grok here seems like it’s been reading @mises and @tuttletwins to learn the truth of the matter.
1
1
28
2,593
Mises Institute retweeted
Replying to @Handre @mises
Perhaps more than any other single book, THIS ONE changed my mind in so many ways. Available from mises.org/online-book/man-ec… in a combined volume that is one of the most powerful books you can own.
1
1
9
854
Mises Institute retweeted
About to get started, the Mises Supporters Summit 2026: "100 Years of Rothbard" mises.org/events/supporters-…
2
4
30
1,950
Mises Institute retweeted
Why does everything a government touches turn to shit? Every tax, regulation, and price control produces an economic consequence its architects either ignore or actively conceal from you. Murray Rothbard's Power and Market, published in 1970, tears apart the intellectual cover governments use to justify intervention. Rothbard builds the case like this: no form of state interference improves on the voluntary exchange economy. Every intervention distorts prices, misallocates capital, and ultimately harms the very people the policy claimed to protect. Take price ceilings. New York City imposed rent control in 1943 as a wartime emergency. Eight decades later, landlords still face legal caps on rents, and the city faces a perpetual housing shortage. Capping prices below market rates destroys the incentive to supply. Investors channel capital elsewhere, housing stock deteriorates, and you pay more for less under the table through bribes, key fees, and "finder's fees" to brokers. Rothbard also categorizes interventions. Autistic intervention forces you to act or refrain without directly involving your property in exchange. Binary intervention forces an exchange between the state and a private party. Triangular intervention forces exchange between two private parties on state-dictated terms. The specificity matters because each category produces distinct distortions, and grouping them all as "regulation" lets politicians dodge accountability for the specific damage each one causes. Then there is the calculation issue. Governments do not possess the price signals needed to allocate resources correctly. Mises already proved this in 1920, and Rothbard extends the argument: intervention actively destroys the information system that makes optimization possible in the first place. Free market thinkers after Rothbard have added data, case studies, and formalized models. None have overturned the logic. Governments intervene, prices lie, and you bear the cost.
33
163
16
551
10,062
The traditional explanation of the Panic of 1837 recognizes that excessive bank credit expansion generates inflation, speculation, and economic instability. Yet, most wrongly assume a national bank was the solution to those problems. | Joshua Mawhorter mises.org/mises-wire/panic-1…
3
6
37
1,906
The demise of American coinage is the story of US money in a nutshell. Coins were made of gold and silver. Today, even coins of base metals have face values less than the value of the metal itself. | Dale Batko mises.org/mises-wire/inflati…
8
13
1
56
2,688
No matter how many times Austrians debunk the Paradox of Thrift, it appears in one form or another, this time in The Atlantic, which claims that retirees are too miserly in spending their savings, thus putting the economy in danger. | William L. Anderson mises.org/mises-wire/no-mise…
5
10
1
72
3,206
Mises Institute retweeted
Printing money is a tax that is never voted on and never appears on a bill. @DrMarkThornton on why Mises and Rothbard treated currency debasement as the most destructive form of taxation, and the one that is easiest to hide. #MinorIssues
4
6
30
1,386
Mises Institute retweeted
Trump is right to lift diesel sanctions. He should go further.
4
7
36
1,158
The proposed California Wealth Tax is promoted as a tool for “social justice,” yet according to the standards set by F.A. Hayek, it undermines the rule of law, not to mention justice itself. | Daniel Sánchez-Piñol mises.org/mises-wire/califor…
1
7
37
1,976
Mises Institute retweeted
Murray Rothbard took Mises's price theory and drove it to a destination Mises never reached. Mises built the case that central planning fails because socialist planners cannot perform rational economic calculation without real market prices. Prices carry information that no committee can replicate. Rothbard accepted every word of this and asked the obvious follow-up: if state intervention distorts prices and destroys coordination, why stop your critique at the water's edge? Why exempt the state itself from the logic? The answer required property rights. Rothbard grounded everything in self-ownership. You own your body. By extension, you own what you mix your labor with, provided you homestead it from a prior unowned state. Every other right flows from this. Taxation is the seizure of your property under threat of imprisonment. From that foundation, Rothbard constructed anarcho-capitalism systematically, not as a utopian dream but as the logical terminus of taking rights seriously. Defense, arbitration, contract enforcement: private firms supply all of it in a competitive market. His 1973 book "For a New Liberty" laid this out with unflinching precision. His 1982 "The Ethics of Liberty" supplied the philosophical scaffolding. What Rothbard accomplished was a fusion, not a compromise. Mises gave him the economic engine. Locke and Lysander Spooner supplied the moral chassis. The result was a system where aggression has no legitimate institutional home, including Congress, including the Federal Reserve, including every bureaucrat drawing a salary your paycheck funded involuntarily.
42
207
19
829
19,695
Mises Institute retweeted
Is it always better to have someone producing something rather than nothing? Chapter 8: "Is It 'Better to Produce Anything than Nothing'? Job Guarantees Versus Idleness" by Lucas M. Engelhardt. One of MMT's signature policy proposals is a federal job guarantee. The government would offer employment at a fixed wage to anyone willing and able to work. They say that this would eliminate involuntary unemployment, put idle resources to work, and help stabilize the economy. But Dr. Engelhardt asks: "Why are resources idle in the first place?" - p. 190 Drawing on W. H. Hutt's The Theory of Idle Resources, Dr. Engelhardt explains that apparent "idleness" isn't necessarily wasteful. A machine might sit unused because its owner expects more valuable opportunities in the future. Someone might remain unemployed while searching for a better job. Students forgo employment while in school. Some people simply prefer leisure to the available employment opportunities. Hutt called some of these situations pseudo-idleness. What appears to be wasted productive capacity is actually in the factor owner's best interest. If anyone else has a better idea on how to use the "idle" machine or labor, they are free to bid for it and employ it. Simply observing that a resource isn't currently being used doesn't establish that putting it to work would improve economic welfare. But there's another problem with the job guarantee: "very few jobs rely on labor alone." - p. 203 Suppose the government hires unemployed workers to paint murals. They'll need paint, brushes, ladders, transportation, etc. Other government jobs require computers, office space, and other equipment. All these complementary resources have alternative uses. And here's where the calculation problem enters (once again--noticing a theme in this book?): "Without accounting for profit and loss, it is impossible to say whether the cost of these workers is worth the value of the services they provide." - p. 204 Dr. Engelhardt points out that even if job guarantee wages are comparable to unemployment benefits, the additional costs of employing workers could make the program substantially more expensive. Anyone (even government bureaucrats!) can find something for unemployed workers to do. The trick is finding something for them to do where the value of what they produce exceeds the opportunity cost. Only the profit and loss system of the market can do that.
11
14
2
61
4,598