The Montaigne Fallacy | Mark Thornton

As the world heads further down the road to trade protectionism and war, Mark takes a look at what Ludwig von Mises dubbed the “Montaigne Fallacy.” This fallacy is based on the illogical idea that with voluntary exchange, one person’s benefits come at the expense of the other, or what we call “zero sum thinking.” Mark shows exactly why the idea is wrong and explains that Montaigne’s other ideas are also wrongheaded.
Be sure to follow Minor Issues at Mises.org/MinorIssues.
Order a free paperback copy of Murray Rothbard’s What Has Government Done to Our Money? at Mises.org/IssuesFree.

[@cryptoemcee]

Thanks, Mark.

[@patrickcasper7487]

Any chance you could do an episode on the new zimbabwe gold-based currency? At first glance it seems like a win in the sound money war, but Im sure there is more to it than meets the eye

[@albionicamerican8806]

Uh, gold ownership is effectively a zero-sum game. The world's per capita refined gold supply is literally about an ounce. That means if you own 10 ounces of gold, then 9 other people aren't going to have any.

[@wo0t7]

More gold is refined with time, the supply is not static. And even if it WAS static, then how on earth was gold the currency of mankind for nearly 2000 years? According to that point of view, we should have seen absolutely no wealth transfer, quality of living improvements, technological advancements, etc for that period, since apparently gold was being horded by the dude with 10 ounces.