Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
I wouldn't want to distract you from Hazlitt. b_b said he bought a foreclosed condo. If we assume that it originally had floors and walls which were destroyed or ruined, someone could make a flawed broken-window argument that b_b's repairs compensate "the economy" for the destruction. But I was taking his condo purchased "as is" as a given. Maybe the developer simply never finished construction. My point is that b_b can create his own wealth simply by investing his time and effort, without necessarily harming or taking from anyone else. I am not sure if anyone disagrees with this, but he seems to imply that people at "the bottom" are necessarily harmed somehow when the wealthy increase their wealth.