Walter Block's critique of my paper fails to address the main argument: that Ludwig von Mises's support for laissez faire comes from a comparison of the systems recommended by the ideologies of socialism, interventionism, and liberalism. Mises compares these systems according to the criterion of their capacity to achieve the goal of satisfying material wants. This goal is either explicit or implicit in the arguments made by those who subscribe to the above ideologies. He uses value-free economic reasoning to determine whether the systems recommended by the three ideologies will achieve the goal. In this reply, I reaffirm the argument in the face of Block's critique. In addition, I address two other arguments. The first is the implicit argument in Murray Rothbard and in Block that Mises erred because he failed to take account of all the goals that policy advocates might have in recommending a policy. I argue that he did not err. The second is that Mises is a utilitarian, an argument also advanced by Leland Yeager. I argue not only that Mises was not but also that he repudiated the idea that his support for laissez faire was based on utilitarian welfare principles. The reply also answers some of Block's more specific criticisms of my paper. Copyright 2005 American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc..
