If it were really the case that terrorists "hate us for our freedoms," we'd be getting more popular with Al Qaeda every month.

Market bashers ... might understand the claim that in some particular field, markets required no intervention--though they'd be skeptical--but the notion that, on general principle, complex systems ran themselves just fine without benign intervention seemed like it could only be the product of a quasi-religious faith. ... Of course, this gets things almost precisely backwards. It is the idea that all order must be explained by a functioning mind at the helm, not its denial, that has the closet affinity to the religious instinct.

If it were really the case that terrorists "hate us for our freedoms," we'd be getting more popular with Al Qaeda every month.

[There is a] strong correlation between market freedom and lower government corruption -- not terribly surprising, since the effect of increasing regulatory power is to shift 'cheating' from the private to the public sphere.

It is the idea that all order must be explained by a functioning mind at the helm, not its denial, that has the closet affinity to the religious instinct.

Why is it that any time government takes over something for a few years, its assumed that people are too incompetent to do it for themselves?

But even if you thought they were adequate at the time, when you're collecting data in bulk-you've got it. The data lasts until you delete it; the rules only last until you decide to change them, and change them in secret.