The preservation of liberty, not the promotion of efficiency, is the primary justification for private property. Efficiency is a happy, though not accidental, by-product - and a most important by-product because liberty could not have survived if it had not also produced affluence.

So the question is, do corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, have responsibilities in their business activities other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible? And my answer to that is, no they do not.

When they so-called 'target the interest rate', what they're doing is controlling the money supply via the interest rate. The interest rate is only an intermediary instrument.

When something goes wrong, the natural tendency is to say, "By God, we need to pass a law and do something."

I think almost every economist would agree that government gets itself in trouble when it tries to interfere with voluntary behavior.

If China don't free up the political side, its economic growth will come to an end - while it is still at a very low level.

To really understand something you've got to reduce it to its principles.