Hear him take on the left’s sacred cows. Diversity is a “commodity.” College is nothing more than “Socialist Camp.” Liberalism is like roulette addiction. Toyota’s Prius, he tells me, is an “anti-chick magnet” and “ugly as a dogcatcher’s butt.” Hollywood liberals—his former crowd—once embraced Communism “because they hadn’t invented Pilates yet.” Oh, and good radio isn’t NPR (“National Palestinian Radio”) but Dennis Prager, Michael Medved and Hugh Hewitt.

But there is a dramatic difference between individuals deciding how to spend limited resources while choosing among competing goods and services and government telling individuals how to spend their money or spending it for them. Even in today’s highly regulated and restricted health care system some choices remain. Ever greater government control ultimately means no exit for anyone—except the wealthy, who can afford to go anywhere for any treatment.

You cannot fix a problem until you understand what the problem is. Unfortunately, politicians and economists in both the US and Europe are still in denial. Statements by those blaming markets instead of politicians and the Fed, do not help.

Three factors have changed since he wrote. First, the practice of universal education has expanded beyond a point which Nock himself could have imagined. Second, the classical ideal of education has become all but entirely unknown. Third, the economy has ever less use for the skills that the university teaches, so it has once again fallen back to private institutions to actually prepare people for a productive life.

That Obama sounded so different from Bush but acts so similarly is good evidence that the actions of the office are highly constrained (perhaps more than ever) by the forces of public choice economics.

Today’s milepost on the road to serfdom: The Obama administration is beginning to impose price controls on the insurance industry. Henceforth, if a health-insurance premium is to be increased by more than 10 percent, the company will be obliged to go and beg the government for its blessing. Incidentally, Congress has enacted no law regarding that 10 percent standard. Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius simply issued a decree. She could have chosen 1 percent, 11 percent, or 0.01 percent. Why 10 percent? Because it sounds nice and won’t confuse dim voters who are not good with math.

This piece describes how voter opposition may derail rule by bankers via IMF, European Commission, and ECB austerity programs in Europe.