- Cafe Hayek - https://cafehayek.com -

Some Links

Tweet [1]

My colleague Bryan Caplan talks to anti-immigrationist Mark Krikorian [2].  A slice:

In my talk, I suggested that open borders would look like an upscale version of the migration-fueled growth [3] that China and India have enjoyed for the last few decades.  Mark accepted the comparison, then turned up his nose at China’s polluted urban centers.  Do I call that progress?

Absolutely.  China has a long way to go, but its growing cities – warts and all – are an earth-shaking improvement over the wretched rural poverty they’re steadily eradicating.  Mark’s cavalier attitude towards the tremendous accomplishments of the Chinese is revealing.  Instead of suppressing his myopic disgust for the ephemeral drawbacks of progress, he revels in it – and encourages others to do the same [4].  It’s no wonder Mark rejects the most promising way to end global poverty in his lifetime.  He has little appreciation for the amazing progress he’s already lived through.

Joseph Maciariello reviews, in the Wall Street Journal [5] (gated), Charles Koch’s new book, Good Profit [6].  A slice:

The phrase “good profit” is defined by Mr. Koch as profit that results from creating value for customers—as the customers themselves define value. As Mr. Koch puts it: “No one can decide which products and services a customer values better than the customer. Dedicating ourselves to satisfying what she values is showing respect for her. This is what generates good profit.” Conversely, he notes, what might be called “bad profit” comes from “disrespecting customers,” by allowing politicians in Washington to choose winners and losers and forcing customers to subsidize companies “with their tax dollars.”

Iain Murray explains that Depression-era diktats threaten the sharing economy [7].

Jeff Jacoby is properly put off by the arrogance of a couple of currently ascendant U.S. politicians entertainers [8].

FEE president Larry Reed remembers the truly heroic Witold Pilecki [9].

John Taylor is rightly unhappy with Paul Krugman’s absurd interpretation of some of his (Taylor’s) writings [10].

Comments