Libertarianism From A to Z With Jeffrey Miron

Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron is probably best known for his influential 2005 study The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition, which laid out in plain detail the high costs and low benefits of keeping pot illegal. During the financial crisis, Miron was one of the most eloquent and insistent voices opposing government bailouts at all levels.

Now Miron has produced Libertarianism From A to Z, an encyclopedic look at everything from abortion to zoos from an angle consistent with classical liberal thought and insights. Miron's book, which covers tough issues such as civil rights legislation, immigration policy, and much more, is simultaneously provocative and engaging.

[JohnJ]

Another benefit to having the most divisive issues settled at the state level is that it doesn't divide us as a nation. But I think politicians prefer to keep the voters as divided as possible.

[leftydanvball]

Possibly the best Reason TV vid. I will prolly buy this guy's book.

[broeman]

@MooseOfReason Ron Paul (R). There are many libertarian disagreements, which are based in the minarchy/anarchy discussion. Being a libertarian is a direction for full personal and economical freedom, and there are many levels of commitment. Putting abortions to a state issue is better than Washington, but it is even better if it was a personal choice, doing it in private clinics that chooses their own moral stand.

[droogie]

Wow, Harvard lets a Libertarian teach there? Who'd a thunk it.

[WendyT]

Go, Jeffery Miron! I love this guy! Great video!

[egcroan]

@beeeefcurtains Good point as the Oil Companies didn't voluntarily remove a Toxin (Lead) from their gasoline because consumers demanded it. In fact just the opposite as consumers complained about unleaded gasoline due to the lower octane numbers and decreased performance that resulted in the shorter term from the unleaded gasoline.

[awarewoofy]

I look forward to watching a new video every Monday morning. Makes my day! :D

[moreaudan]

New Hampshire would never give up their liquor and lottery monopoly.

[slumlord]

It took him a whole book to do what I can do in two bullet points.

Defining Libertarianism:
1. Follow the Constitution
2. Leave me the f*ck alone

And to answer any questions asking "what about X?":
1. The 9th Amendment. (Just because it wasn't enumerated in the bill of rights, it doesn't mean that right doesn't exist)
2. The 10th Amendment. (If a power isn't explicitly granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution, then those powers are reserved to the States)

[eonomen]

@DRDecrease The very fact that people disagree on when a fetus becomes a child despite advanced scientific understanding of fetuses is proof that it should be handled regionally until humanity as a whole comes to a consensus on what works best rather than forcing them all to adapt to a hardened national law that most people including you may disagree with

[Thorbie]

@billyjoeallen I have my worries too. In an economic setting, utilitarian/consequentialist libertarianism may not be a big threat, but in other areas it can be. Richard Posner is one example. He's politically libertarian, but as a federal judge has said "the constitution is not a suicide pact." The problem i see with consequentialist is all opponents have to argue is that their position produces a greater utility, not about the violation of natural rights or simple right and wrong.

[Thorbie]

Sounds like a nice little policy book for the layperson or someone new to libertarianism. = Almost like a light alternative to the lengthy and historically based Radicals for Capitalism. I like the idea for this book, but I wonder if the book will include multiple reasons for the positions it espouses. I think any stripe of libertarianism is positive, but I think a rights based view is the more important one. Consequentialist libertarians can produce unintended consequences (ex. Richard Posner).

[GenghisVern]

the slavery issue shouldn't have been left to the states. rights to vote not up to the states "to create competition". Which every side you're on, this is a human rights issue, not a question of local government.

[eonomen]

@DRDecrease the problem is that politicians never debate they only dictate which is why their decision should be last followed by the civilizations movement

the debate is up to us as we are civilization not government

and my personal stance is that abortion is very bad especially once a child has brain activity enough to react memorize and act on it's own but unless you tag and monitor every person you won't stop it all you can do is mitigate it by making society around better and preventing--

[FerretDude]

I just don't see the point in abortion.. if a mother doesn't want to raise a child, why not put the baby up for adoption when it's born? I mean, better to give the mother that option than forcing her to raise that child or killing them.

For all we may know, many child births could have been accidental through a broken condom or the woman being raped.

[RalphKSwanson]

Very nice video. I suggest you GOOGLE "Libertarian International Organization" to see what Libertarians are actually doing.

[Mastikator]

He seems like a pretty moderate and unradical kind of guy.

[billyjoeallen]

This guy is a hive-minded Utilitarian. Libertarianism is classical liberalism, which is to say a political philosophy based on natural rights, not "the greatest good for the greatest number." Prof. Miron is no libertarian.

[megagagnon]

the EEOC is the worst organization, only good if you're a lawyer.

[eonomen]

@raptor2391 The problem isn't kids that where not aborted but kids that where born after failed abortions committed by desperate mothers with coat hangers and over the counter drugs often dieing after birth or leading horrible malformed lives that no matter how many nice people there are in the world would never quite feel happy about their predicament unless mentally handicapped to an extreme in which case the quality of their life wouldn't even be human it would be simple input/output.