What is Morally Right About Economic Freedom | Daniel Lapin

The 2009 Lou Church Memorial Lecture in Religion and Economics, presented by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Recorded at the annual Austrian Scholars Conference, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 12 March 2009. Includes a Welcome and Introduction by Joseph T. Salerno.

• Category

  News & Politics

[rrp1973]

I thought alot about this. What value have I added to the world when I make a profit by shifting money around in my brokerage account. Then I realized, the value I add is that I am accepting risk that others were not willing to take. Profit is my reward for taking that risk. Any worker can participate in the same way. If they dont want to risk their savings on such a thing I respect that. But don't say I exploited your labor profitng from taking a risk you were not willing to take.

[TracyII77]

What is morally wrong, is when those involved on the stock market lie and decieve (such as happened with Enron). What does it matter how much someone profits, if they raise the living standard of society at large? Profit is not immoral. Deception is.

[John Wren]

I posted this with headline MAKING MONEY AS A SPIRITUAL EXERCISE, if you have experience DOING this, please call me (number on link) and I'd like to have you on our Small Business Chamber's The Startup Show, JohnWren (dot) com

[MrMemyselfandi415]

Go to 7:25 if you want to skip the LOOOONG intro. Thumbs up so others can save the time too.  PEACE!

[samuils]

No sound the way that in our system a poor person would not be able to afford security. What about the courts? Again privately hired? What about disputes in business dealings? What about army? Or do you think if we have no armies, all countries in the world would follow? What about higher level of corruption, since police do not have to answer to anyone anymore? And what if a wanna be dictator gets all socialists together and starts a revolution, since you got rid of the national forces?

[Hashishin13]

You sound as if you are saying that government law books somehow magically empower police officers to chase criminals in a way that they couldn't with private arrangements. At the end of the day there are rules, enforcers and punishments in both systems. Who and what these are have changed though. The police would be hired by individuals or voluntary societies, they would enforce property rights and the law would instead be the rules put in place by property owners.

Watch "Market for security"

[samuils]

I just told you why the police is needed "however it is the law that allows the enforcers to pursue him and put him away so he doesnt do harm anymore." Who in your anarchy will enforce the "rules"?

[Hashishin13]

No I want rules with enforcement, I don't want a monopoly on enforcement. The monopoly called the state claims to be the only group that can provide law, international defense and defense against local criminals. To pursue its monopoly it also claims the right to steal from all of us.

If the top down gov laws don't stop murderers why are they needed for police to stop murderers? Anarcho-capitalists believe in rules, not law, provided through contract. Search on YT: "market for security Murphy"

[samuils]

So you want rules without any enforcement? Sounds great, and people will not violate those rules just because they are angels? I get it that once a murderer has committed a crime, the laws didnt stop him, however it is the law that allows the enforcers to pursue him and put him away so he doesnt do harm anymore.

[samuils]

"Atheists Are Parasites" No he actually DIDNT say that.

[ButtSolution]

Hey Lapin, how's Jack Abramoff doing these days? Keeping in touch with him? Sorry about that whole "profiting from Indian casinoes" thing going tits up. But hey, you've got a decent job on an evangelical TV network now, so there's that. Yep. A whole network of people who believe you'll burn in hell for eternity. But it's not about the money, oh no. Not at all.