Tuesday, June 7, 2016

UGH, Charles Murray Now Stars in a One Minute Video Clip Promoting a Universal Basic Income

Charles Murray is a perfect example of what Murray Rothbard called a liquidationist.

As a "libertarian," Charles  should be calling for the end to government coercion in the economic system not advancing new methods of coercion.

Rothbard made clear:
 To be inconsistent in the name of “practicality” is
to betray the libertarian position itself, and is worthy of the utmost



  1. Henry Hazlitt, F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman supported Basic Income at least at times during their careers. Hazlitt later recanted, but I don't know about the other two.

  2. The basic problems with a 'basic income' scheme:

    a) Activists will continue to argue that it is never 'enough.'

    b) It makes the disutility of work that much HIGHER. Even if it is argued that this 'basic' income will not be enough for a single person to live off and thus will be compelled to find employment, most people are ingenuous and will come up with money-saving schemes in order to AVOID work, like living space-sharing and other consolidations.

    c) Since a 'basic income' is the same as giving away money without the benefit of trade or exchange, the money would have to come either from taxation, inflation or debt. All those actions will end up affecting the economy negatively; they will impact market prices and this will eat away the benefits this 'basic income' would purport to bring, which would lead back to point a) Activists will continue to argue that it is never 'enough.'