I don't want to comment as much on that as I do on another point Dr. Block makes during his exchange:
A similar situation occurs with regard to the Public Choice notion about “rent seeking.” I have also been on the (intellectual) warpath in an attempt to change this to “loot seeking” or something of that sort. Maybe, “theft seeking.” Why? Because it is improper to characterize so inoffensive a concept as “rent” in this nefarious way. But, maybe, “rent seeking” is now a name? I have no idea if this is true, nor how to determine the truth of this claim. And, I don’t much care. We ought to substitute “loot seeking” for “rent seeking” because the former is not misleading while the latter is.
On that see this:
Block, Walter E. 2002. “All Government is Excessive: A Rejoinder to ‘In Defense of Excessive Government’ by Dwight Lee,” Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 35-82. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/16_3/16_3_3.pdf; rent seeking, market failure
Block, Walter E. 2000. “Watch Your Language,” February 21; http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=385&month=17&title=Watch+Your+Language&id=19; http://mises.org/daily/385
I am with Dr. Block here. "Rent seeking" is most certainly a name in the sense that Dr. Gordon is using the term, but it would certainly help the cause to align the name with a term that is more descriptive of what is going on. I hereby support Dr. Block's call to advance the term "loot seeking"and I have added the definition to the EPJ Research Room.