Thanks to the progressives on both sides of the moat, we now live in an America where a girl can work hard, practice, become a top-tier athlete in her sport, and lose a college scholarship to some middling dude pretending to be a girl. And how is that fair?

If she pretends to be a boy, she can’t compete with girls. If she remains a girl, boys can steal her scholarship opportunities, which, for some young women, might be the only way they land on a more desirable campus. And if she complains, she risks being blacklisted and outcast by people who likely agree but lack the courage to take a stand. And it matters. Washington University has broken the seventh seal by giving a college scholarship for women’s sports to a guy.

Male takes women’s volleyball scholarship at @UW … a soon-to-be Big 10 school

Stealing the already few opportunities for women at the collegiate level. How can he be proud?@UWVolleyball should rescind the scholarship if they really care about women. He can play with the men. pic.twitter.com/Dj7VcDWlW4

— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) December 13, 2023

Not to worry. Most, if not all, of the girls competing against this volleyball drag queen had no idea she was a he, and the ‘elites’ writing the rules – much like those for the COVID vaccines – encourage less transparency. (Related: 6 ft 2 in Transwoman Athlete “Stands Out” as She Dominates Biologically Female Opponents.)

Marshi Smith, co-founder of the Independent Council on Women’s Sports, told Reduxx that her organization knows “many of the girls [Drageset]’s playing against do not know that they are competing against a male.”

“There has been no consideration from his family to tell female athletes or coaches the truth,” Smith said. “They have not been transparent, so girls are repeatedly and unknowingly put at a disadvantage and not given the chance to opt out over increased safety risks.”

And there are risks to the girls, young women, the culture, and most importantly, the future of sport for women. What point is there in trying to excel at something when you know that at any point in the arc of your sporting life, some C-Team beta male can put on the same uniform, insist you call him Francis, and to just rob you of not just victory and opportunity but require you to dress and undress in the same locker room.

In none of these instances is your comfort a concern. So, why would you bother?

The post New World Order: Men Are Officially Taking College Sports Scholarships from Women appeared first on Granite Grok.

As younger generations grow older and take on adult responsibilities, they will, at some point, struggle with the cost of housing. This year alone, more than 582,000 people in the United States are without a home, with about three in ten people being part of families with children.

Governments today have implemented various policies recommended by different schools of economic thought, predominantly that of the Keynesians, to address the issue of homelessness.

Despite their efforts, the total number of chronically and nonchronically homeless individuals continues to grow. To reduce these numbers would require a phenomenon that appears enigmatic, but there is no enigma. The solution deals with the most fundamental economic law of Austrolibertarianism and its satisfaction by abstraction: human action. With this foundational lens, the removal of zoning laws is derived to address homelessness in the United States and abroad.

The laws of supply and demand are known by all who have a basic understanding of economics, but what is less known is that they are praxeological laws. Praxeology is the study of the implications logically derived from the action axiom. This foundational axiom posits that “man acts,” and from that statement, all conclusions of praxeology are logically and a priori obtained. Thus, as Ludwig von Mises concludes in his magnum opus, Human Action,

Its cognition is purely formal and general without reference to the material content and the particular features of the actual case. It aims at knowledge valid for all instances in which the conditions exactly correspond to those implied in its assumptions and inferences. Its statements and propositions are not derived from experience. They are, like those of logic and mathematics, a priori. They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts.

A priori knowledge and justification are procured without experience, for they are logically derived. Examples include “all bachelors are unmarried” and “two plus two equals four.” The meaning of the word “bachelor,” the state of being unmarried, can be analytically deduced, and an understanding of the addition property and the integer two will result in an answer of four for the equation without having to “experience” it. Moreover, a priori knowledge is a foundation that determines a chain of necessity through deductive claims and noncontradiction. Accordingly, in the case of praxeology, to say man does not act would be contradicted by one doing so (“act” referring to purposeful behavior that employs means to reach a given end). Furthermore, as Murray N. Rothbard writes in his book Economic Controversies, “Since praxeology begins with a true axiom, A, all the propositions that can be deduced from this axiom must also be true. For if A implies B, and A is true, then B must also be true.”

Unlike a hypothesis that must be proven or unproven, a priori statements are true in all possible worlds. Their negation can never be logically valid. It MUST be the case that “there are no square circles” (B) because its negation (“there are square circles”) would violate the law of noncontradiction (A). Similarly, it MUST be the case that if “two plus two equals four” (A) is true, then “four minus two equals two” (B) is true as well.

It is frequently asked, “How can praxeology be applied to the material world if it is only theory?” It is the same with mathematics: by identifying components of abstract models along with their material analogs. This process is called “catallactics,” the application of laws concerning human action to market analysis. The removal of zoning laws to address homelessness is derived from this epistemology.

Zoning laws are specific rules and regulations for pieces of land divided into zones by the government or a municipality. They began with the Los Angeles zoning ordinances of 1904 and the New York City zoning resolution of 1916 and were originally motivated by racism, but they are now believed to help the housing industry. The laws dictate allowable uses of land or property inside zoning districts, meaning certain land can only be used for a predetermined reason, like agriculture. This creates an artificial limitation on the total amount of residential buildings that can be constructed in a given area, thereby leading to an issue where price cannot be brought down by supply.

In other words, they eliminate the houses, apartments, etc. that otherwise could have been built. Consequently, houses become so expensive that they become a hassle to afford for those without a lot of money, which tends to be the case for younger generations trying to find their footing, especially those from marginalized ethnic and racial backgrounds without a trust fund.

The laws of supply and demand were briefly mentioned as the epistemological justification of the suggested policy. The axiom that “man acts” informs this law because to every end there are means that must be implemented. These can come in the form of any given market product that is desired according to man’s intrinsic value hierarchy. Simply put, he desires to buy products that will allow him to accomplish his most desired ends first. The law of demand is, at its core, marginal utility applied to catallactics. Rothbard writes, “All action involves the employment of scarce means to attain the most valued ends. Man has the choice of using the scarce means for various alternative ends, and the ends that he chooses are the ones he values most highly. The less urgent wants are those that remain unsatisfied.”

Of equal importance and magnitude is the law of supply, which states that as the price of a good increases, the amount of that good supplied on the market will also increase and vice versa. It is also derived from praxeology because as the potential utility gained from undertaking an action increases, the likelihood of performing it increases also.

These laws in return tell us what happens with the removal of zoning laws. By limiting the total number of residential buildings that can be constructed, sellers and renters can increase their prices exponentially without fear of having no buyers. Ergo, if demand is high (which tends to be the case in the housing industry because shelter is essential) and supply is not allowed to rise, prices will inflate with people still willing to buy.

There are several counterarguments to nonzoning with the most common being that they promote safety by keeping hazardous activities away from residential and public areas. While this is a valid complaint, there are other ways to do this without feeding a housing crisis—namely, self-regulation via tort law. According to the American Museum of Tort Laws, “Tort law has been called the law of wrongful injuries. It is the law that protects and compensates people who have been injured by the negligence, or recklessness, or intentional acts of wrongdoers.”

An industrialist who chooses to build in residential areas will be liable for any damage incurred by the residents from their activity. Under tort law, it is possible to sue for noise, air, and land pollution, just to name a few. This is the same for unseen effects because it is possible to trace their origins back to an industrialist’s activity. In addition, because there is no state limit to liability, the penalties can be severe. This incentivizes insurance companies to raise their premiums and correctly estimate risks and costs because it is more likely for them to get sued. They are also more inclined to make the developers adopt reasonable safety standards or charge exorbitant premiums because related lawsuits are the largest class of civil litigation. Although this is ex post, meaning the damages have already occurred, developers would want to insure against this liability and operate elsewhere.

It is important to note that other factors do come into play when dealing with homelessness. But as long as man acts (A), affecting supply and demand (B), and A is true, then B must also be true. And if B implies a relationship between zoning laws and homelessness (C), then it must be true as well. Furthermore, the relationship between homelessness and zoning laws is a priori and therefore true in all cases. Thus, we can logically conclude that the downward pressure zoning laws placed on supply limits the accessibility of housing and thereby increases the total number of unsheltered individuals.

To picture a world where people are unable to afford a home is to think of a world with low life expectancy, decreased birth rates, and more unfortunate fates that succeeding generations will be subject to with the continued existence of zoning—a law that hides its perniciousness under the disguise of prosperity.

Taiwo Agbeluyi is a freshman at Divine Savior Holy Angels who loves to learn about Economics and Political Philosophy. She is fascinated by human action and its application. She also likes to apply her analytical skills and creativity to building robots for various challenges and competitions. Taiwo is a curious and ambitious student who strives to make a positive difference in her community and beyond.

Taiwo Agbeluyi | Mises Wire

The post Zoning Laws: Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing appeared first on Granite Grok.