I sat down with my friend Aaron Voisine, of BRD (formerly Breadwallet), to discuss how the average worker/saver would invest and save in a Bitcoin world. Would they hold some stocks? Real estate? Bonds? Or would they keep close to 100% of their savings in cash, as many bitcoiners seem to assume? And related issues. I doubt people would keep most of their savings in cash since they would chase higher returns and also diversify away from some risks unique to monetary assets. Voisine dissents. I have questions, not answers, while Voisine thinks he has answers.
Kinsella, Aaron Graham, Aaron Voisine, Juan Carpio, at Bitcoin 2021, Miami
Kinsella, Aaron Lasher, Aaron Voisine, Aaron Graham, Juan Carpio, chilling during Bitcoin 2021, Miami
Maybe some tax expert can set me straight on the following assumptions, but from what I can tell, federal income tax law technically should make it virtually impossible to have a space program and to have anyone but a billionaire as president. Bear with me. [continue reading…]
My appearance on a new youtube channel, This Time I’m Curious (TTIC) with Jesse Munson, Episode 1 (recorded July 4, 2021).
We talked about a variety of topics — the history/evolution of libertarianism and my involvement in it, Ayn Rand, the Ron Paul movement, animal rights, AI consciousness and AI rights, artificial meat, quantum mechanics, UFO’s, music, movies, guilty Youtube pleasures, Objectivism, The Fountainhead, Kinsella’s place in the libertarian movement, alcohol addiction, etc.
Libertarian guru Andrew Galambos’ intellectual property beliefs were so extreme that he paid royalties to the descendants of Thomas Paine every time he used the world “liberty.” But did he steal his radical ideas from someone else?
A bust of Thomas Paine atop his monument in New Rochelle, N.Y. libertarian guru Andrew J. Galambos’ intellectual property views were so extreme that he paid royalties to the descendants of Paine every time he used the word “liberty,” which he claimed was coined by Paine.
Joe Sohm Visions of America/Newscom/File
Christian Science Monitor
October 28, 2011
By Stephan Kinsella
Guest blogger
I’ve written before about the quirky scientistic California libertarian guru Andrew J. Galambos, and his extreme, crazy IP ideas. 1 Galambos believed that man has property rights in his own life (primordial property) and in all “non-procreative derivatives of his life”—the “first derivatives” of a man’s life are his thoughts and ideas—these are “primary property.” Since action is based on primary property (ideas), actions are owned as well; this is referred to as “liberty.” Secondary derivatives, such as land, televisions, and other tangible goods, are produced by ideas and action. 2[continue reading…]
COPYRIGHT & SATOSHI’S LEGACY WITH STEPHAN KINSELLA OF THE OPEN CRYPTO ALLIANCE
On June 29, 2021, a UK court found that Australian computer scientist Craig Wright is the proper copyright owner of the Bitcoin Whitepaper, awarding initial damages in excess of $48,000 to Wright and demanding that Bitcoin.org remove the Whitepaper from its site. Guest Stephan Kinsella of the Open Crypto Alliance joins Tatiana today to talk about the decision and why it reveals all the most troubling problems with the government-run patent, trademark & copyright system. He discusses the background of the case and the personal financial interest that he believes is driving Wright’s copyright trolling campaign. And he also gives his own thoughts on Bitcoin, blockchain technology, smart contracts and more. [continue reading…]
This piece now includes some broken links. In particular, the piece I was replying to is now here: Jonah Goldberg, “The Libertarian Lobe,” National Review (June 22, 2001).
This was my talk delivered today (June 26, 2021) at PorcFest 2021: “Kinsella’s Libertarian “Constitution,” or: State Constitutions vs. the Libertarian Private Law Code.”
The notes that I roughly followed are below; pix also below. Transcript below.
Down with the Bill of Rights: Heller and the Central States Cheerleaders
Stephan Kinsella
Draft
June 2008
“[T]he rule of law is a myth and like all myths, it is designed to serve an emotive, rather than cognitive, function. The purpose of a myth is not to persuade one’s reason, but to enlist one’s emotions in support of an idea. And this is precisely the case for the myth of the rule of law; its purpose is to enlist the emotions of the public in support of society’s political power structure.”
Starting in 1995, just after Rothbard’s death and after meeting Hans-Hermann Hoppe, 1 I attended several of the interdisciplinary Austrian Scholars Conferences, held by the Mises Institute in the Spring, in Auburn, AL—at the Auburn University Hotel and Conference Center, before the Mises Institute had its own building completed. I presented various papers at the ASCs, many of which were published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies or elsewhere, many of which will be incorporated into my forthcoming Law in a Libertarian World. The ASC has since been superseded by the AERC, or Austrian Economics Research Conference, held in the Spring at Auburn, and the Libertarian Scholars Conference, held a few times in recent years in New York.
For the Austrian Scholars Conference held April 1998, I chaired the Law and Economics panel, and presented a paper, “Constitutional Structures in Defense of Freedom: Are They Possible?” I did not record my talk nor did I ever officially publish the paper, which was somewhat informal and more sketched out as notes for the talk; it is reproduced below.
Libertarians & the Religious Right: an Interview with Stephan Kinsella
by Alberto Mingardi
N. Stephan Kinsella is co-author of the book Protecting Foreign Investment Under International Law: Legal Aspects of Political Risk (Oceana 1997), as well as co-editor of the legal treatise Digest of Commercial Laws of the World (Oceana 1998). He is actively involved with the Ludwig von Mises Institute, one of the best think tanks around.
“As far as libertarianism goes,” says Kinsella about himself, “I am most interested in rights theory, about which I have written in law reviews and other journals like Reason Papers and the Journal of Libertarian Studies, and law and economics. I have attempted to develop a framework justifying and grounding rights, which is based on the legal concept of ‘estoppel’.” [continue reading…]
Recent Comments