Pam Brown wrote:
> They are well-intentioned Statists. They're trying to develop an intellectual framework to replace the Hayek/Kirzner discovery process / spontaneous order approach to rules & property formation, with a Buchanan/Rawls benevolent planner/Contractarian model for deciding 'just' property rights.
Can you please cite the best libertarian critique of georgism/geolibertarianism that you've seen in the economic literature? I am singularly unimpressed with the critiques I've seen here so far: "statist", "collectivist", "socialist", "fascist", "slave", "lame-a**", "bullsh*t", etc.
Such name-calling is to be expected in arguments from non-academic libertarians. But when they come from a Chicago-trained economist, I take that as a strong signal that no better anti-geolibertarian arguments are in fact available.