Well, duh. Of course it is. That’s the whole point of it. The rhetoric of people like President Obama notwithstanding, statists dislike innovation and entrepreneurialship because they’re both disruptive factors that make statist control of society more difficult or impossible. If you’re in the business of telling other people how to live and how to run their affairs, innovation and entrepreneurialship are problems that need to be fixed, not virtues to be encouraged.
Ira Stoll at Future of Capitalism talks with GOP hopeful Harry Wilson, who says, with reference to the pay-for-play scandals that have hit New York and other states, that he "would not be an active litigator" on the securities front.... […]
Before the Blair House confab on health care and then in a March 3 letter to members of Congress, President Obama made much of his acceptance of Republican ideas on health care reform, such as medical liability reform. The President's... […]
The Civil Justice Association of California is out with updated details on its adversaries' political contributions, which topped $4 million in California's '07-'08 political cycle.... […]
Comparative law edition: Many human rights cases in UK now being filed by businesses [Times Online] Emulate new-style European chemical regulation? Look before you leap [Angela Logomasini, NRO; Jonathan Adler] High-paid UK barrister denies charges of overbilling for legal aid... […]
{ 2 comments }
Is this a rhetorical question?
Well, duh. Of course it is. That’s the whole point of it. The rhetoric of people like President Obama notwithstanding, statists dislike innovation and entrepreneurialship because they’re both disruptive factors that make statist control of society more difficult or impossible. If you’re in the business of telling other people how to live and how to run their affairs, innovation and entrepreneurialship are problems that need to be fixed, not virtues to be encouraged.
Comments on this entry are closed.