Completely irrelevant, but I would be curious to estimate the salaries (of their jobs or professorships and from their writings) of the top libertarian authors.
T Woods, Block, L. Rockwell, D. French, Murphy, Hoppe,Tucker, etc,
Anyone care to take a guess
Help me understand what you are trying to accomplish. What is the point if it is all speculative?
Merely curiosity
I would guess Murphy’s at the top. Didn’t he make it into the New York Times best sellers list? I don’t know if any of the others have done so.
Woods did, too, I think.
The question is: why do you think you are curious. They get by and some get by better because of book-sales. Why would you need to know more?
Yes, let’s have a peek into your mind Mr. Dyke, you know, out of curiosity! [:D]
Ooo sounds like a science project
Well let’s see. One motivation I have is to reaffirm my belief that support of the free market is not about profits, since those companies who are most free market are the least profitable. In fact, if profit were the main incentives you would turn to government to solidify barriers of entry. Competition breeds efficiency for the consumer but is dire for the producer, that is, when you can produce safely from under the umbrella of government. It would be nice to show what everyone already knows, that free market authors make less then other quasi free-market economists; again, its not about profit.
Finally, I have a very inquisitive nature.
I’d like to offer some constructive criticism. Human action is all about profit seeking. Action without profit seeking is irrational. Some guy cutting on his skin, for example, is properly seen as crazy. The fact that free market supporters aren’t rolling in cash speaks to consumer preference, not producer motivation.
Glad to meet you!
“The fact that free market supporters aren’t rolling in cash speaks to consumer preference, not producer motivation.”
And why aren’t producers motivated to produce things our consumers prefer? Their motivation to continue to produce what consumers do not prefer must stem from causes of ethical/moral/truth.
We have many talented writers that could write for the yoke of economic readers, yet, they prefer a small sect of radical free-marketers. I suppose you could argue that entering into mainstream writing carries with it more competition. My point was, why some business seek ends via handouts while others seek ends via competition?
It is probably a similar case as to why someone who is skilled in making shoes does not become a baker. It’s probably not so much that the mainstream has more competition, because the market for free-market professors is much smaller and has a very large amount of scholars demanding positions, but the fact that a free-market economist has a particular skill set. In this case, it might be easy for a free-market economist to just lie, but there is the moral and ethical question, as well.
Besides, it does seem as many free-market economists are tempering their ideologies in an effort to gain recognition in the mainstream.
Aside from requiring the words “as much” in between “prefer” and “must,” I can’t seem to find anything wrong with your explanation.
Salud.