I really liked this interview with Molyneux, and particularly enjoyed the interviewer, a fellow named "Harminder Singh"; he disagreed with Molyneux on certain points, but stayed calm and focused strictly on ideas, versus ad hominems and silly cheap shots.

One thing which struck me was that this Mr. Singh seemed to agree with Molyneux ideologically in general, but appeared ready to throw all of his principles overboard as soon as a personal sensitivity was brought up: in this case, the cost of housing in Hong Kong. "Perhaps Singapore, where eighty percent of housing is controlled by the State, is the correct model?"

Those who are proponents of the free market are speaking for one hundred percent of people: in all human hearts, everyone agrees that they should not be coerced-- and thus should no one, derived from the principle of universalization. It's one hundred percent accepted common sense-- it's stating the obvious! The only reason anyone has ever argued against it, is because they personally want something they can't have right at that moment. And they are willing to be complete and absolute hypocrites to get whatever "it" is for them: willing to lie, steal, cheat, and pillage if necessary, while decrying anyone who would dare do the same to them!

Freedom-- people voluntarily exchanging goods and services-- maximizes the most utility for the most people, most of the time. But that's totally different than everyone getting what they want, whenever they want it! In the case of Mr. Singh, maybe young people should find someplace else to live, other than the expensive main city? So what if rents are high for ten or fifteen or twenty years: things always reach equilibrium and markets will always clear, as long as the State doesn't interfere. If there is demand for lower-cost housing, it will be built, if not now then later! He needs to learn patience.

The irony in all of this is that a popular ad hominem thrown at free market proponents is "utopian". But it's the critics and Statists who are "utopians"! The second they reach any kind of discomfort, they are willing to start swinging around the nearest rifle! By contrast, no freedom advocate claims that all things will be perfect all of the time-- only that people left to maximize their own utility is the optimal way to achieve general, aggregate social utility.