There is no place for government to prohibit consumers from buying products the effect of which will be to harm themselves.

History suggests that capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom. Clearly it is not a sufficient condition.

The major basis for my opposition to marijuana prohibition has not been how badly it's worked, the fact that it's produced much more harm than good - it has been primarily a moral reason: I don't think the state has any more right to tell me what to put into my mouth than it has to tell me what can come out of my mouth.

Everywhere, and at all times, economic progress has meant far more to the poor than to the rich.

I believe the role that people like myself have played in the transformation of public opinion has been by persistently presenting a different point of view, a point of view which stresses the importance of private markets, of individual freedom, and the distorting effect of governmental policy.

In a bureaucratic system, useless work drives out useful work.

When everybody owns something, nobody owns it, and nobody has a direct interest in maintaining or improving its condition. That is why buildings in the Soviet Union - like public housing in the United States - look decrepit within a year or two of their construction.