ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
Bryan describes Block's definition as "inept, misleading and even insulting." But Block has carefully defined economic freedom as the degree to which a worker owns the product of his/her labor.
Under this definition, Block seems to be correct in stating that an income tax reduces economic freedom by reducing the extent to which a worker owns the product of his/her labor.
It would appear that Bryan is criticizing Block, but Bryan has not made it clear if he is criticizing Block's definition per se, or - on the other hand - the application of the definition to an income tax. Nor has he clarified why he is either finding the definition or its application to be flawed.
So I'd like to see clarification of both these issues.
Read the piece, Les. Block is describing Paul Craig Robert's definition as "inept, misleading, and even insulting."