No Free-Market Famines?

By -
Some balding, religious guy asserted this was the case in comments upstream. However, he must not be aware of the year without a summer, when "many residents of New England and the Canadian Maritimes froze to death, starved, or suffered from severe malnutrition." Now, I know these areas still had some government, but this was a pretty darned free market society we're talking about, and this natural disaster nevertheless created severe problems. On the other hand, there are cases where sound government planning seemed to avert the worst consequences of a natural disaster.

Some people believe that the "true free market" is a construction that can be built up high enough that man will reach heaven, and will no longer suffer the vicissitudes of earthly life. Such projects have not gone well in the past.

Comments

  1. Avram8:07 PM

    Yes Gene, and if a volcano erupts and kills everyone the market won't help either.

    But get this: the government can!

    *rolls eyes*

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy8:24 AM

    Fair enough, Gene, I guess I should say from now on, "The market has virtually eliminated famine."

    It's interesting though, that the case you need to bring up involves basically a worldwide calamity. Obviously the existence of a market can't make more food come out of the ground than Nature wants to give. The point that I had in mind (copying somebody else who had said it, apparently also ignorant of the "year without a summer") was that markets are really good at moving goods from surplus regions to areas in deficit.

    Anyway, I still think the people in Texas would be a lot better off today, if we'd had a free market in water in the US for the last 50 years.

    ReplyDelete
  3. gcallah12:50 PM

    Avram, you are being an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah12:51 PM

    "Anyway, I still think the people in Texas would be a lot better off today, if we'd had a free market in water in the US for the last 50 years."

    Bob, as I've repeatedly said, institutions certainly matter!

    ReplyDelete
  5. gcallah12:55 PM

    I accidentally deleted Avram's comment: "Before you say "I was clearly talking about famines not volcanoes" we all know what you're talking about. i.e. that saving via insurance policies can most prudently be planned by the government and that market insurance fails."

    Is that what I was talking about? Thanks for filling me in, because I had no idea.

    ReplyDelete
  6. gcallah2:13 PM

    It's funny, isn't it, that when you talk about the economic catastrophe of recent years, libertarians say, "You can't blame that on the free market -- it doesn't exist!" But when it comes time to claim credit for the near elimination of famines, then the non-existent free market gets all the credit!

    ReplyDelete
  7. gcallah2:17 PM

    Oh, I'm not familiar with those findings, Silas. Have a link?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Silas Barta2:31 PM

    Is that a reply to my mention of the two empirical regularities predicted by evolutionary psychologists? If so, it's only fair that you first show how those phenomena are "obviously to be expected" without simply copying and re-writing the EvoPsychs' argument in a way that makes it look like an easy inference.

    Pray tell, how exactly would you have otherwise figured out that poor women are more likely to keep having children until they bear a boy?

    ReplyDelete
  9. gcallah2:34 AM

    Yes, sorry Silas, I was responding to a bunch of comments in a batch and posted that reply in the wrong thread.

    In any case, links, please, if you have any.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more