• "Well written, well researched, and the thesis put forth is well argued.... Woods has opened up an area of historical analysis that should invite further study."
    -Journal of American History

  • "During these times that challenge our freedoms there is no one more qualified to make U.S. history relevant to the fight against big government than Thomas Woods."
    -Barry Goldwater Jr.
    Former Member of Congress

  • "I strongly recommend Woods's work."
    -The Honorable Ron Paul,
    U.S. House of Representatives

  • "Written with great clarity and fluency, making the complex philosophical and theological concepts approachable."
    -Journal of American Studies

  • "A must-read."
    -Barron's

  • "An excellent reading source for anyone interested in financial markets, and much more so for anyone interested in learning about capitalism without all the misinterpretations being thrown about in the financial media."
    -Asia Times

  • "Provocative, well-written, and deserves to be read."
    -Catholic Historical Review

  • "An engaging and important contribution to scholarship on the history of American Catholicism."
    -Journal of the Historical Society

  • "Woods and [co-author Kevin] Gutzman appeal to both left and right in this constitutionalist jeremiad…. The authors' exegeses of the Constitution and court decisions, heavy on original intent arguments, are lucid and telling."
    -Publishers Weekly

  • "A marvelous read. Every chapter taught me something new and unexpected."
    -Tom Bethell, senior editor,
    The American Spectator

  • "The hottest book today is Meltdown, by my friend Tom Woods."
    -Judge Andrew Napolitano, senior judicial analyst,
    FOX News Channel

  • "Should be required reading."
    -Economic Affairs (London)

  • "Woods, one of the best classical liberal [libertarian] scholars of his generation, has once more placed us in his debt with this lucid and tightly argued book."
    -David Gordon, The Mises Review

  • "Tom Woods is one of my dearest allies in the struggle against wrong-headed and dangerous economic policy."
    -Peter Schiff

Self-Driving Cars?

Is this just crazy talk? I can’t tell if I’m being scammed here. (Courtesy of Insurance Quotes.)

Unlearn the Propaganda!

  • http://plenarchist.wordpress.com/ plenarchist

    Not a scam per se.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car

    Google has been working on this technology for a while that I’m aware of. But IMO it’s a really bad idea that would result in lots of severe crashes even though Google thinks otherwise.

    The driving environment has way too many variables for such a scheme to work reliably and given the thousands of miles millions of people drive each year in infinite kinds of road conditions, I don’t see it happening except maybe under highly controlled conditions – Interstate in clear dry weather. It’s one thing to take a single test vehicle that’s maintained under controlled conditions and drive it around and altogether a different animal to implement on a large scale with J.Q. Public.

    One big safety problem with this technology is that drivers must be alert to sudden changes anyway as they drive but won’t because the car is driving itself… Just doesn’t make sense to me. And take out the steering wheel, brake pedal, etc. and you could be in for some unintended but very exciting trips – if you survive.

    If the goals are to reduce congestion, improve safety, conserve energy and have cleaner air, a new transport model needs to be developed like PRT – http://plenarchist.wordpress.com/2012/02/04/mag-lev-personal-rapid-transit-prt/ – but of course government is the immovable obstacle to all innovation (that doesn’t involve murdering people at any rate – they’re good at that).

    Self-driving cars is one of those “sounds great on paper” ideas. Implementing it in the real world with real people under real conditions is far more difficult. And getting the “blue screen of death” on the dash while going 65 MPH takes on a whole new meaning…

  • Anonymous

    Cool tech for sci-fi movies. Many of the benefits are only realized in a system involving complete automation of all vehicles. 62 million cars(registered cars only) costing 10,000 each to retrofit.This assuming the cost falls to 10,000 per vehicle for all the sensors, stepper motors, computer systems, safety mechanisms, and labor to install it all. So 620 billion dollars.

  • guest

    It’s an excuse for more government intervention. Not as cool as you think.

  • http://twitter.com/MachinShinn Machin Shinn

    With the continued growth of cities world wide, I’m hoping cars are phased out completely, self-driven or otherwise.

  • Chris Cain

    Cue Rush’s Red Barchetta. :D

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Sedkowski/100001467305337 Paul Sedkowski

    electric too?
    bicycles?
    lol

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Sedkowski/100001467305337 Paul Sedkowski

    The funny thing here is – the poster says “Car crashes cost the US economy $230 Bn per year”. Hey what about that “broken window” then! ;)

    Do you think it’s just US government-owned vehicles that crash to the tune of $230 billion annually? Because if they’re private, and privately insured – then how exactly does it cost the US economy? If anything, it might boost it – breathing some life into that old broken window fallacy…?

    Other than that – the idea is on par with ANY public transport. Some of it is good, some of it is bad – and all of it, if “publicly” ran, is notoriously underperforming.

  • Anonymous

    I think that they only use the broken window fallacy when they have to, even they realize its absurdity.(they being people that use the broken window fallacy)

  • anon

    Why is Google in this business anyway? What is the libertarian stance on this activity – that is someone who calls them mainly a search engine get their hands into so many unrelated things like cars, power grids, etc…?

    This is some kind of control tool for gov’t – I don’t know how they will end up using it to control or restrict.

    Shouldn’t there be laws prohibiting a search engine co from going into other markets? Clearly, what google doing is not good as all their projects are evil. But from a libertarian standpoint, should this be allowed and how can google be stopped from doing all this?

    The public did not know for years that google was developing this, as well a whole host of other wierd projects like an elevator to outerspace.

  • Daniel Brooks

    There are already cars on the market that can parallel park themselves. My understanding is if people were more trusting of automation they’d be doing a lot more than that today, so 30 years from now? Who knows.

  • http://plenarchist.wordpress.com/ plenarchist

    Should you be more concerned that Google is researching self-driving cars or that it has been a DARPA program? The self-driving car Google is researching started as a DOD initiative under the DARPA Grand Challenge.

    According to the Wikipedia page I linked below, Google is now trying to change laws that will permit self-driving cars on public roads. I think it’s a bad idea from a safety standpoint but obviously there’s a lot more concern with gov tentacles in the mix.

    Imagine your car “deciding” to drop you off at the local police station for questioning after eavesdropping on your “private” conversation. But I suppose that won’t really matter since the gov will be assigning to each of us our own micro-drone anyway that follows us around 24/7. A brave new world indeed…

    http://greenplanetparadise.com/2646/are-we-in-a-nano-based-surveillance-state

  • Anonymous

    A few things to examine here from different perspectives:

    Google is dangerous, for many reasons, most of which should be obvious.

    If this is what the market is coming to and allows, then bring it on. Personally, self-driving cars may, in fact, be safer down the long stretch than we can imagine.

    Self-driving cars will beat out heavily subsidized boondoggles such as light rail.

    Need to be wary of a “killswitch” that the government can have operable with the roads and these cars. Self-driving cars is right on the cusp of 1984.

  • NJDave

    Audi and their parent company Volkswagen AG are quite serious about this.

  • anon

    Either way, I would be interested in legislation that libertarians propose to assure companies are operating ethically, such as full disclosure, anti-trust, etc…?

    Espousing free mkt principles is one thing, but to gain converts, you have to provide a detailed solution to mitigate their fears/concerns/questions.

  • Chris Barcelo
  • http://www.facebook.com/levi.russell.7334 Levi Russell

    “I would be interested in legislation that libertarians propose to assure companies are operating ethically, such as full disclosure, anti-trust, etc…?”

    Uh… seriously? Anti-trust? You want the gov’t, who you are afraid will get control of Google’s activities, to keep Google from engaging in those activities? That doesn’t sound rational.

    “Espousing free mkt principles is one thing, but to gain converts, you have to provide a detailed solution to mitigate their fears/concerns/questions.”

    So, in order to properly convert people to free enterprise we have to espouse the opposite of free enterprise?

  • anon

    ‘detailed solution’ is not the same as ‘espouse the opposite of free enterprise. how to unravel what exists now and what to replace it with and how to replace it is along the lines of a solution.

  • http://www.facebook.com/pileofkyle Kyle Barton

    I would like this if we had a privatized road system and a less influencial government in general. A lot of the things in the infographic, such as increased efficiency and virtual elimination of accidents are true.

  • devo

    id like it if it was free market and completely optional. i still like to drive my self thank you. its like those google glasses, reality is just being thrown out of the window, one less thing to think about.

  • Anonymous

    I’m an automobile enthusiast, therefor I’m a purist that would never set foot in one of these things. Shoot, I still don’t even know how to drive an automatic.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Bell/1063326951 Christopher Bell

    It’s extremely hard, you probably couldn’t handle it.

  • http://www.praxacademy.com Rothbardian

    “90% of crashes are because of driver error”… of course the poorly designed government roads have nothing to do with any traffic accidents.

  • jhowa

    and the gmen will require an 80 percent tax rate to upgrade everything, but hell by 2040 there will be no government…hopefully

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=193303596 Zachary Larsen

    “Programmed to follow local traffic laws.”
    Strike one.