It's worth noting that Monopoly (the Board Game) was inspired by the Landlord's Game by Elizabeth Magie, a Georgist. So, maybe without Henry George, we wouldn't have Monopoly. So, we can thank him for that! :P
George was very free-market on almost everything except land. He was arguably the most influential free-trader of the 19th century! Furthermore, he offers a credible alternative to all other forms of taxation. And libertarian doubts about the legitimacy of land ownership go all the way back to Locke (or probably earlier). So it's not a big puzzle, really.
Hi Dr. Caplan, I know you’re flooded with asks, so no need to respond anytime soon. Sharing two questions below:
--------
1. A few years before, but certainly post-2020, there has been a clear global shift toward the “Big Government Right vs. Big Government Left.” In the U.S., we’ve seen populist, big central government leaders reemerge on the right (Trump) and left (Mamdani, AOC), and the same dynamic is visible across Western and Central Europe (Duda, Farage, Le Pen/Bardella).
The Ask: As libertarian or small-government policy and leaders continue to shrink from political discourse and elected representation in the West, what do you see as a potential catalyst for reversing this trend? Examples could include a global financial bust, widespread conflict, or growing anti-elite sentiment.
I’m not expecting a single answer — more a high-level view of:
A) Whether this trend is likely to naturally correct back toward healthy libertarian representation in Western left and right, and
B) Whether a specific event or significant sentiment shift would be required to revive libertarian representation and dialogue in government.
--------
2. I’m a big fan of your exchanges with Robin Hanson on AI and its societal implications. I work in this space, and I’m particularly intrigued by the convergence of software and hardware that enables, for instance, robot construction teams rapidly building structures, spacecraft, or space infrastructure — alongside humanoid robots replacing many U.S. service jobs at scale.
The Ask: If by 2035, 70–90% of traditional service and manual labor jobs were replaced by humanoid robots, how would this affect the economic benefits you see flowing from open borders? Positives from the open-border policy in many areas beyond the economic aside, do those who believe this future is coming, and that it will lead to a dramatically increased welfare state, have a point?
Caveats:
A) I remain a strong defender of your perspective on open borders, economics, ethics, etc.
B) Even if you disagree with this vision of the future, I’d value your take on the scenario.
C) It seems as if the anti-immigration push both in the US and in the West in many ways anticipates this future. Despite the nefarious undertones, I do worry about this as an impetus for CBDC's/UBI.
--------
Thank you for the time you've shared with us to answer these!
The Ask: If by 2035, 70–90% of traditional service and manual labor jobs were replaced by humanoid robots, how would this affect the economic benefits you see flowing from open borders? Positives from the open-border policy in many areas beyond the economic aside, do those who believe this future is coming, and that it will lead to a dramatically increased welfare state, have a point?
>If humans stop doing much work, most of the economic gains of open borders go away, of course!
Caveats:
A) I remain a strong defender of your perspective on open borders, economics, ethics, etc.
B) Even if you disagree with this vision of the future, I’d value your take on the scenario.
C) It seems as if the anti-immigration push both in the US and in the West in many ways anticipates this future. Despite the nefarious undertones, I do worry about this as an impetus for CBDC's/UBI.
>Anti-immigration attitudes are eternal. In the data, Americans at least are about as pro-immigration as they've ever been! Voters don't even see the present clearly, much less the future!
I’m not expecting a single answer — more a high-level view of:
A) Whether this trend is likely to naturally correct back toward healthy libertarian representation in Western left and right, and
>I don't think there ever was much libertarian representation in either side. Near-zero on the left, maybe 5-10% on the right. The Republicans were more libertarian than many libertarians in 2020-21, but that's gone.
>Since there never was much libertarian representation, there's little reason to think anything will "correct," I'm afraid.
B) Whether a specific event or significant sentiment shift would be required to revive libertarian representation and dialogue in government.
>Almost any crisis will be anti-libertarian. What's best for liberty is peace and prosperity.
What do you think of the idea that animal ethics is a double sigmoid: insects at the bottom, dogs/cows/pigs/etc. at the first plateau and humans at the second plateau?
In my opinion, this explains why people have pet dogs but not pet insects and why many consumers want higher welfare animal-based products (see DOI: 10.1007/s41055-022-00105-3) and why most people react with moral disgust to videos of factory farming of cows/pigs/etc.
This is also an argument against Huemer's stance. If there's this second plateau, then I think the moral intuition is something like: As an evolved omnivore, I have a reasonable personal health primacy of eating first-plateau animals; however, if I have sufficient excess wealth, then there's an ethical obligation to make reasonable efforts of reducing first-plateau suffering when possible.
This niche market is growing with products certified by independent bodies such as Animal Welfare Approved.
Do you ever worry that libertarianism can lead us to being LESS free? For example, you are free to protest on a public sidewalk, but not in a private mall. If all sidewalks were privatized, we might lose our right to protest. Does this worry you?
A few times over the last 20 years, a close friend has written something I thought was totally unfair to me. It hurts but I strive to see the big picture!
Please explain what exactly you mean by politicians being "power-hungry?"
I can think of two possible meanings:
1. They are so intent on seeing their vision come to life that they will stomp on people in their way and refuse to give up, even when it's just not working.
2. They literally get some sort of hedonic thrill out of imposing their will on people.
hWhy don't you think there's not more competition between municipalities? For example, there are over 100 municipalities in Greater Boston... hWhy not a Yimbyton, Massachusetts?
Do you have two or three recommendations for history books (textbooks or popular publications) that focus on the broad sweep of global, post World War II history?
If you're still answering questions, could you rank/give your thoughts on each of the following economic schools of thought? The Austrians, the Keynesians, the classic Chicago School, and the economics department at GMU.
GMU econ is the best econ department in the world for me. We punch far above weight in intellectual and popular influence, but we're struggling to find a new generation to carry on our work.
In hindsight, the generation that grew up in the 1970s and 1980s was especially free-market, and the collapse of the Soviet Union gave us a huge shot of confidence. The internet helped libertarians, but helped other dissident movements even more, alas.
Why do you think there is so much policy similarity across different countries? Most all countries have some form of public education, fiat currency, recreational drug prohibition, public roads, etc. Some of these can be explained by people solving similar problems in obvious ways (including securing power in obvious ways), some might be explained by people having natural biases that predispose us to making similar mistakes, and some might be explained by bandwagon effects where leading countries set an example and everyone else follows. Do these explanations seem right to you, and are there others that seem as or more important?
Social Desirability Bias has some cultural specificity, but most of it is universal. Even things like "We need to be especially concerned about women" seem very universal, though of course different cultures apply them differently.
Do you see any significant near misses in US history where the United States might have gone in a significantly more libertarian direction? If an election had gone differently, if a terrorist attack had been avoided, if a court decision had been changed, etc.?
Lots. The Euclid case was 6-3 in favor of zoning, and could easily have gone the other way. Milton Friedman blamed the Great Depression on Fed Chairman Benjamin Strong's heart attack, and I think he's probably right. Without the Great Depression, the New Deal gets delayed, and Hitler probably never comes to power.
Goldwater 1964? He was rhetorically more hawkish than LBJ (see the Daisy Ad), but in hindsight, it’s not clear he would have been worse than Johnson on Vietnam. Goldwater certainly wouldn't have created the Great Society and maybe even rolled back part of the New Deal.
But Goldwater was too radical for most Americans and ran after JFK was assassinated.
Do you feel like your wife and kids share pretty much all your controversial views? What are main areas of dispute? (I know you’ve said she doesn’t want you betting large sums of money, your excellent track record notwithstanding.)
Do you notice major personality / rationality differences between you and any of them? Are they higher in neuroticism or agreeableness or lower in conscientiousness? How have you navigated that?
Why do you think that some otherwise market sympathetic people sympathise with Georgist housing policies? Do you have any time for Henry George?
It's worth noting that Monopoly (the Board Game) was inspired by the Landlord's Game by Elizabeth Magie, a Georgist. So, maybe without Henry George, we wouldn't have Monopoly. So, we can thank him for that! :P
George was very free-market on almost everything except land. He was arguably the most influential free-trader of the 19th century! Furthermore, he offers a credible alternative to all other forms of taxation. And libertarian doubts about the legitimacy of land ownership go all the way back to Locke (or probably earlier). So it's not a big puzzle, really.
I have one paper on Georgism (with Zac Gochenour) which I'm still proud of: http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/georgism.pdf
Hi Dr. Caplan, I know you’re flooded with asks, so no need to respond anytime soon. Sharing two questions below:
--------
1. A few years before, but certainly post-2020, there has been a clear global shift toward the “Big Government Right vs. Big Government Left.” In the U.S., we’ve seen populist, big central government leaders reemerge on the right (Trump) and left (Mamdani, AOC), and the same dynamic is visible across Western and Central Europe (Duda, Farage, Le Pen/Bardella).
The Ask: As libertarian or small-government policy and leaders continue to shrink from political discourse and elected representation in the West, what do you see as a potential catalyst for reversing this trend? Examples could include a global financial bust, widespread conflict, or growing anti-elite sentiment.
I’m not expecting a single answer — more a high-level view of:
A) Whether this trend is likely to naturally correct back toward healthy libertarian representation in Western left and right, and
B) Whether a specific event or significant sentiment shift would be required to revive libertarian representation and dialogue in government.
--------
2. I’m a big fan of your exchanges with Robin Hanson on AI and its societal implications. I work in this space, and I’m particularly intrigued by the convergence of software and hardware that enables, for instance, robot construction teams rapidly building structures, spacecraft, or space infrastructure — alongside humanoid robots replacing many U.S. service jobs at scale.
The Ask: If by 2035, 70–90% of traditional service and manual labor jobs were replaced by humanoid robots, how would this affect the economic benefits you see flowing from open borders? Positives from the open-border policy in many areas beyond the economic aside, do those who believe this future is coming, and that it will lead to a dramatically increased welfare state, have a point?
Caveats:
A) I remain a strong defender of your perspective on open borders, economics, ethics, etc.
B) Even if you disagree with this vision of the future, I’d value your take on the scenario.
C) It seems as if the anti-immigration push both in the US and in the West in many ways anticipates this future. Despite the nefarious undertones, I do worry about this as an impetus for CBDC's/UBI.
--------
Thank you for the time you've shared with us to answer these!
The Ask: If by 2035, 70–90% of traditional service and manual labor jobs were replaced by humanoid robots, how would this affect the economic benefits you see flowing from open borders? Positives from the open-border policy in many areas beyond the economic aside, do those who believe this future is coming, and that it will lead to a dramatically increased welfare state, have a point?
>If humans stop doing much work, most of the economic gains of open borders go away, of course!
Caveats:
A) I remain a strong defender of your perspective on open borders, economics, ethics, etc.
B) Even if you disagree with this vision of the future, I’d value your take on the scenario.
C) It seems as if the anti-immigration push both in the US and in the West in many ways anticipates this future. Despite the nefarious undertones, I do worry about this as an impetus for CBDC's/UBI.
>Anti-immigration attitudes are eternal. In the data, Americans at least are about as pro-immigration as they've ever been! Voters don't even see the present clearly, much less the future!
I’m not expecting a single answer — more a high-level view of:
A) Whether this trend is likely to naturally correct back toward healthy libertarian representation in Western left and right, and
>I don't think there ever was much libertarian representation in either side. Near-zero on the left, maybe 5-10% on the right. The Republicans were more libertarian than many libertarians in 2020-21, but that's gone.
>Since there never was much libertarian representation, there's little reason to think anything will "correct," I'm afraid.
B) Whether a specific event or significant sentiment shift would be required to revive libertarian representation and dialogue in government.
>Almost any crisis will be anti-libertarian. What's best for liberty is peace and prosperity.
What do you think of the idea that animal ethics is a double sigmoid: insects at the bottom, dogs/cows/pigs/etc. at the first plateau and humans at the second plateau?
In my opinion, this explains why people have pet dogs but not pet insects and why many consumers want higher welfare animal-based products (see DOI: 10.1007/s41055-022-00105-3) and why most people react with moral disgust to videos of factory farming of cows/pigs/etc.
This is also an argument against Huemer's stance. If there's this second plateau, then I think the moral intuition is something like: As an evolved omnivore, I have a reasonable personal health primacy of eating first-plateau animals; however, if I have sufficient excess wealth, then there's an ethical obligation to make reasonable efforts of reducing first-plateau suffering when possible.
This niche market is growing with products certified by independent bodies such as Animal Welfare Approved.
The double sigmoid is a clever idea! Though the lower plateau would have to be WAY below the higher plateau to justify even hunting and such.
That seems reasonable
Do you ever worry that libertarianism can lead us to being LESS free? For example, you are free to protest on a public sidewalk, but not in a private mall. If all sidewalks were privatized, we might lose our right to protest. Does this worry you?
You wouldn't lose your right to protest; you'd just have to pay rent to do so. What's the big deal?
Can you think of any way that Intellectual Property rights could be enforced in an Ancap Libertopia (tm)?
What's wrong with lawsuits?
You seemed to indicate that the government of India should do more to help homeless kids...
Is there anything else that you think the government of any country should do *more* of? (At least, in the short term)
Better treatment of people incarcerated for immigration offenses?
Have you ever been deeply hurt, offended or angered by any of the comments on your blog?
Or just annoyed or thought the commenter was a total idiot?
A few times over the last 20 years, a close friend has written something I thought was totally unfair to me. It hurts but I strive to see the big picture!
Having had both sons and a daughter, have you noticed any differences in personality that you believe are attributable to biological sex?
Yes, overwhelming differences. As I've written, I think written personality tests drastically understate true gender gaps here: https://www.betonit.ai/p/why-self-reports-understate-gender
Please explain what exactly you mean by politicians being "power-hungry?"
I can think of two possible meanings:
1. They are so intent on seeing their vision come to life that they will stomp on people in their way and refuse to give up, even when it's just not working.
2. They literally get some sort of hedonic thrill out of imposing their will on people.
or... 3. Something else?
Mostly (2).
hWhy don't you think there's not more competition between municipalities? For example, there are over 100 municipalities in Greater Boston... hWhy not a Yimbyton, Massachusetts?
Mostly because people just aren't that different, especially within a common political culture. Trump got 38% of the vote in California!
Which country do you think has the free-est free speech?
The U.S. is close to the top. I don't know of any country that's clearly better, but that might just be an oversight on my part.
Do you have two or three recommendations for history books (textbooks or popular publications) that focus on the broad sweep of global, post World War II history?
Paul Johnson's *Modern Times*, both the 1983 and 1991 editions.
If you're still answering questions, could you rank/give your thoughts on each of the following economic schools of thought? The Austrians, the Keynesians, the classic Chicago School, and the economics department at GMU.
As free-market radicals, the Austrians added a lot of value, but unfortunately they so a lot of third-rate philosophy, too.
Self-styled Keynesians are generally reflexive statists, but New Keynesian macro is basically true.
The classic Chicago School was great, but unfortunately their Panglossian tendencies eventually derailed their incisive pro-market perspective. See http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/pdfs/friedmantowittman.pdf.
GMU econ is the best econ department in the world for me. We punch far above weight in intellectual and popular influence, but we're struggling to find a new generation to carry on our work.
Why are you struggling to find a new generation to carry on your work?
In hindsight, the generation that grew up in the 1970s and 1980s was especially free-market, and the collapse of the Soviet Union gave us a huge shot of confidence. The internet helped libertarians, but helped other dissident movements even more, alas.
Why do you think there is so much policy similarity across different countries? Most all countries have some form of public education, fiat currency, recreational drug prohibition, public roads, etc. Some of these can be explained by people solving similar problems in obvious ways (including securing power in obvious ways), some might be explained by people having natural biases that predispose us to making similar mistakes, and some might be explained by bandwagon effects where leading countries set an example and everyone else follows. Do these explanations seem right to you, and are there others that seem as or more important?
Social Desirability Bias has some cultural specificity, but most of it is universal. Even things like "We need to be especially concerned about women" seem very universal, though of course different cultures apply them differently.
Do you see any significant near misses in US history where the United States might have gone in a significantly more libertarian direction? If an election had gone differently, if a terrorist attack had been avoided, if a court decision had been changed, etc.?
Lots. The Euclid case was 6-3 in favor of zoning, and could easily have gone the other way. Milton Friedman blamed the Great Depression on Fed Chairman Benjamin Strong's heart attack, and I think he's probably right. Without the Great Depression, the New Deal gets delayed, and Hitler probably never comes to power.
Goldwater 1964? He was rhetorically more hawkish than LBJ (see the Daisy Ad), but in hindsight, it’s not clear he would have been worse than Johnson on Vietnam. Goldwater certainly wouldn't have created the Great Society and maybe even rolled back part of the New Deal.
But Goldwater was too radical for most Americans and ran after JFK was assassinated.
Do you feel like your wife and kids share pretty much all your controversial views? What are main areas of dispute? (I know you’ve said she doesn’t want you betting large sums of money, your excellent track record notwithstanding.)
My wife heavily watches the news despite my strong anti-news stance. I'd say she shares my general outlook but considers me too extreme.
My older sons and I see very eye-to-eye. Just marginal disagreements on anarcho-capitalism and the fertility effect of NIMBYism.
My younger son knows his basic econ but still gets a lot of his ideas from reddit.
My daughter has read my "Don't Be a Feminist" but isn't very argumentative.
Do you notice major personality / rationality differences between you and any of them? Are they higher in neuroticism or agreeableness or lower in conscientiousness? How have you navigated that?
Here's a full OCEAN ranking of my family, from highest to lowest:
Openness: Valeria, Bryan, Simon, Tristan, Aidan, Corina
Conscientiousness: Corina, Aidan, Tristan, Bryan, Valeria, Simon
Extraversion: Bryan, Valeria, Simon, Tristan, Aidan, Corina
Agreeableness: Simon, Valeria, Corina, Bryan, Tristan, Aidan
Neuroticism: Simon, Valeria, Corina, Aidan, Tristan, Bryan
The twins were tested when they were 10, and are extremely similar yet marginally different in every way I expected.
With my kids, I try to navigate by finding common interests with each. I game with the twins, travel with Simon, and sing with Vali.