Austrian Economics versus Mainstream Economics | Mark Thornton

[isedairi]

So, I wonder how Austrian economists define capitalism? On the basis of markets and property rights?

[MichaelPolios]

Ron Paul = great ideas, highly unrealistic

[bilsim1]

@MichaelPolios Because only killing the innocent, robbing the taxpayers and lying to the world is "realistic"?

[MichaelPolios]

@bilsim1 What, that's not what i meant. He's goals are unrealistic; for instance, he wants to bring back the gold standard but that's never going to happen therefore it's an unrealistic goal.

[bilsim1]

@MichaelPolios Why is it unrealistic? To me it makes perfect sense and would greatly benefit the USA.

[kamaujackson811]

@MichaelPolios

Kindof comical.......He wants X, I think X will never happen, therefore X will never happen.

[devourerofbabies]

Mainstream economists use laboratory rats? So we should be able to test this assertion by looking at different universities and measuring the price of laboratory rats relative to the size of their economics departments.

[devourerofbabies]

"We're the oldest school of economic thought"

Yeah, because someone invented it in 1730 and you haven't changed since.

"We're also the smallest school of economic thought"

There's a reason for that.

[americanIDOLfan11111]

wow.. i wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Ron Paul.. I wouldn't even be into politics if it wasn't for him.. the man changed my life.. now its time for him to change all our lives... vote...

DR. RONALD ERNEST PAUL 2012 PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[wisebbq1]

If you throw a 100 darts at a dart board it's likely that you'll hit the bulls eye. don't forget about all the times they where predicting hyperinflation. It never came true.

[gsapp59]

@wisebbq1 Give me one instance of predicting hyperinflation;  And don't cite Krugman's fallacious blog post

[wisebbq1]

@gsapp59 Easy just type into Youtube "Peter Shiff hyperinflation

[gsapp59]

@wisebbq1 Umm He said that in 2009; I would give another 4-5 years to prove a currency crisis wrong

[wisebbq1]

@gsapp59 watch more videos

[shitaye12]

Austrian economics is for people who can't do math.

[TheNarcMan]

Hey guys,

Im a left leaning Aussie who has only really taken an interest in this stuff since Ron Paul started to show up in places like the Daily Show because mainstream media was being unfair ignoring him.

I just wanna ask coz I'm genuinely curious & worried about some of this stuff;

1. If a country goes back to a gold standard would there be enough money for a truly necessary war in self defense?

2. How did the U.S government get money before income tax in 1913?

Sorry if these are really basic

[Ltpeppers05]

@TheNarcMan 1. The united states was able to fund ww2 on the gold standard and when Eisenhower was president Americas revenue was greater than its expenses. so its not impossible for us to fund a war on the gold standard like so many people say.

2. Before 1913, Americas government didn't need all of the money it does now because it didn't have all the departments, regulations, and programs that it does now

hope my answers satisfied your questions

[TheNarcMan]

@Ltpeppers05

Thanks. I guess it's the most basic common sense stuff that came to my mind anyway but until you see it working I can understand why people are concerned or threatened by it. It's obvious something has to change though. If nothing else it'd be good for Paul to go against Obama to make the left rethink war mongering, printing paper money, borrowing & fighting a pointless drug war. I judged Libertarianism by mainstream media. Now I see it can transcend left/right, black/white etc.

[Ltpeppers05]

@TheNarcMan libertarians and liberals share alot of idea, but also strongly disagree on alot of others. if you characterized politics based on personality types you could say: liberals find solutions with feelings and emotions, libertarians find solutions with rationalizations and logic. but the majority of libertarians analyzes a situation and look at it from every point of view. We're pretty much the only group that does this so we can find the most logical solution

[Ltpeppers05]

@TheNarcMan One thing I think most libertarians follow is the idea that "the end does not justify the means"

[reasonvspower]

I can't believe people believe this crap. Admittedly, Austrians like Schiff and Ron Paul come across a grain of truth every know and then. 1) Economics is not a science, its assumptions do not hold in reality. 2) There has never been a 'free market' and Adam Smith argued for no such thing. The 'invisible had' appears a monumental three (3) times in ALL of his work. 3) Virtually every developed country did it through public spending (its called the Pentagon = internet, computers, automation...

[TonyBeanify]

@reasonvspower I know the answers for your concerns. But I'm not going to answer it for you, cause from my observation, your willingness to insult Austrian Economics although you don't understand it; shows that you lack willingness to accept new knowledge. This video doesn't get over 97% likes for nothing. Ever wonder who's actually being the noob here? Maybe you just come out from college, still being innocent. Spent a few year more in the library to smarten yourself up!!

[weho1]

@TonyBeanify Apparently all it takes to insult Austrian Economics is disagreeing. Some things said about Deflation R accurate but it doesn't follow it's a desirable outcome except for reletively small group of rich preditory capitalist who look at a depressed economy as an opportunity to consolidate/monopolize markets, impose a Dickensian society and ecomomically exploit others with impunity. Did anyone else notice Thorton's slip referring to "hiring kids"? Guess child labor = more profits $.

[Vdrummer182]

Can someone tell me what are the models or basic models in Austrian Economics? I'm very interesting in this school of thought. I'm very tired and disappointed of mainstream economics, even though knowing them are helpfull in some level.... and what do u think about monetarism???

[richardsharp75]

@Vdrummer182 I would recommend for starters that you read Principles of Economics by Carl Menger. In fact, you can download it for free at at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Just go to the site and search for Menger. Good luck.

[Vdrummer182]

@richardsharp75 Thank u so much for taking your time to answer... I'll do it right away :)

[underdogg20]

I'm definitely a supporter of Austrian Economics, but I disagree with the notion that having a safety net for the losers on the free market is detrimental to an economy. I see having a social safety net as the key to prevent the gap of wealth distribition go out of control. I confirmed myself in that belief when I heard Tom Woods say in one of his speeches that he was surprised to learn that being an Austrian Economist, does not automatically mean you are a Libertarian.

[Cornampoo]

@underdogg20 do you recognize the detrimental effects of an institutionalized safety net on incentives?

[underdogg20]

@Cornampoo Yes, but I think that is a very clinical approach of solving a problem. It's actually very Keynesian thinking. You can not understand what the outcome of a certain economic policy will be, because in order to predict the outcome, you have to have a complete understanding of a culture and human psychology, which is impossible. Instead I would look at the statistics of what the outcome is of certain policies and solely base my predictions on that. That's Austrian thinking.

[Cornampoo]

@underdogg20 no, predicting behavior isn´t Keynesian, (exact calculations are though). Austrians use Mises' praxeology to predict outcomes. Certainty of rescue will screw with risk assessments and thus eventually with behavior, the result of which we see all the time. If, however, a rescue is voluntary (charity), there are no guarantees. So that wouldn't screw with incentives, hence a better system.

[underdogg20]

@Cornampoo If you want I can look up the statistics, to show that industrialized countries with big welfare do not have higher unemployment rates or a longer average of the unemployed staying on welfare. But even if there was a significant correlation between welfare and the amount of people that are on it, I would still argue that a better economy does not equal a better society. Justice and fairness are the goal, a good economy is just an instrument to achieve that. Not the goal itself.

[IBloodSweatTears]

You like Austrian Economics? You will like Ron Paul. Google him.

Ron Paul 2012.

[splendidtrouser]

@IBloodSweatTears

I like Austrian Economics, but I don't like politics. Ron Paul is cool, but the idea that he can become president fix society by becoming president, is to commit Hayek's pretence of Knowledge fallacy. It requires knowledge that 1 man cannot possibly possess.

Real Change will come from the market, not the state... no matter how libertarian its members are.

[Andersll11]

@splendidtrouser But that's the thing, Ron Paul want to "fix" the society by getting the government out of the way and let the market do the job.

[svennbreng]

You explaned it well, Thanx

[videomakerman1232]

It all makes sense!

Ron Paul 2012!

[TheStfu1000]

why do you have to use a gold standard ie gold coins instead of just not printing money out of thin air like the current government inamerica does.

[TheSlowThinker]

It seems that deflation and recession are viewed as a good thing in Austrian Economics - an important part in a growing economy. People are "forced" to be creative, entrepreneurial when times are tough. Indeed if I lost my job, I too would try to be clever and figure out a way to survive. However, looking at the results of all the unemployed today, I doubt I would be very successful.

I think Austrian Economics would be really good for the really rich.

[BurritoBazooka]

@roboeco Please use less capital letters.

[dellwon]

Mainstream economist are afraid of "hyper deflation." Deflation is good, inflation is bad.

[Blazen1212]

@dellwon Large Deflation destroys an economy u moron

[suereed]

Very good. Mr. Thornton. Deflation R' US... if only...

Question: Why is the oldest school of Economic thought so ignored?

What happened?

With Mises and Heyek and Rothbard so clearly RIGHT...

How did it ever get so wrong?

Is Socialism to blame?

[TheManiacalSatanist6]

I got into an argument a while back with a follower of the Walrasian method of mathematical calculation. He said that money isn't an item of supply and demand because money is the medium of exchange. I pointed out that there is a supply of and a demand for money. He acknowledged that, but then proceeded to show his intelligence with this; "Sure there's a supply of money, but because money is the medium of exchange, money can't exist in the realm of supply."

Logic escapes him, apparently.

[diurdi]

And to those who say that Austrians are correct in their predictions only because they predict doom at all times, how come Austrians predicted that the end of WWII would build up huge economic growth while Keynesians believed the loss of "employment" by the soldiers would be bad for economy.

[oiuoiu988]

Thornton is wrong to say austrians want a gold standard, the prevailing view seems to be that government should have nothing to do with the creation of money.

[bazsohamster]

i like deflation and i like value better then anything else it be really nice if money was backed up by something of value again, you can buy more with value a lot more better i wish we could go back to the days where we had something of value backing up our money, i could handle that i really would, and i feel having money left over and not know what to do with it after we got all of our wants and needs is a very big lesser evil and wonderful thing

[sdgsdf45]

Very well explained on how we should perceive deflation as a good thing!

[JessicaBelle81]

Isn't the other side of the coin to the first-time home buyers tax credit that the $6000 tax deduction actually elevated market prices of homes. Because, without it, homes would have been $6000 cheaper?

Oh and not to mention that you have to pay property taxes on the elevated assessed value.

[1981busch]

This worry's me, this style of economics is logic, only those who can succeed will, yet once they do, they will re establish the old systems, such as our current economic system, with 'improvements' that have always, and will always fail. This suggests that this is just history repeating its self, with no fundamental change. The fact that Peak Oil is now rearing its ugly head, demands a fundamental, and irreversible elimination of all old methods.

[jffryh]

the one & only thing austrian economics gets wrong is the climate/environment. it is a public good that needs gov't protection.

[jackjillsean]

@jffryh Just what I have been thinking recently, things like the environment where everything can't be brought under property laws need government. Climate Change or the unleaded fuel thing where tort would have been impractical are mandates that are valid.

[jackjillsean]

@jackjillsean and old growth forests, specific biospheres,etc.

[jffryh]

@jackjillsean Thanks for supportive comments.

climate is in dire crisis situation. we need to end all world fossil fuel industry by next tuesday.

tipping point of no return is dec of 2016 (onehundredmonths. org).

tipping point venus syndrome, where all life on earth get incinerated within few centuries.

watch?v=ACHLayfA6_4

please help spread the word?

standupeconomist yoram bauman

watch?v=9utlDdLhaTU

watch?v=7u6Os0TDR6o

[god0fgod]

@jffryh The fact that you think you can predict a "tipping point" down to a month suggests you are a complete lunatic.

[Moragauth]

@jffryh Bull. Shit.

Why does it need gov't "protection"? Seems you're the one who gets "it" wrong, and btw economics does not make moral claims of that nature nor does it deal with them. Public goods are an arbitrary non-category.

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@jffryh

Every piece of land on the planet has been carved up between various governments, who lease it out only provisionally and nepotistically, revoking the privilege immediately if their unilaterally determined terms are not met. Regulatory boards the world over have been granted Habeus Corpus-defying powers of censure in the pursuit of environmental protection. We see abuses occur in inverse proportion to the degree of private ownership - not so much with privately-owned homes or

-

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

-

businesses, but much more on the commons, such as the ocean, or when slash-and-burn outfits procure short-term easements from their accomplices in government.

Government is protecting the environment right now. And look what a fine job it is doing, and at what a low cost. It's almost as good as the job it does of protecting the poor, or protecting its citizens against violent aggression.

[FreedomParadox]

Great fundamental teachings. Thanks Mark Thornton!

[RKAddict101]

Another great speech for a beginner like me of Austrian economics. I took one year of economics in high school, and really the whole reason Austrian economics is so appealing is because it's logical. Everything makes sense to me. The government has been wrong time and time again about what effect their policies will have on the market, and it makes complete sense to say that because of that, they should really have a more minimalist approach to lawmaking.

[Solverwiz]

So what's wrong with today's ponzi economics? Isn't a giant central planning bureaucracy deciding our economic decisions the way to go? Don't you like the promises of security in exchange for the real removal of freedoms? Didn't the majority vote for all these goodies? Let's all shout the "Progressive's" slogan, "Food stamps for everyone or bust."

[qtutoringhelps]

Austrian economics dates back to 1730, and yet only 1 out of a 1000 (!) economists would consider themselves associated with the school. I think the movement is a failure, no.

[FreedomParadox]

@qtutoringhelps

You have a strange definition of failure my friend.

[qtutoringhelps]

@FreedomParadox

Let`s consider the facts. Darwin`s *On the Origin of Species* was published in 1859. Virtually all professional biologists today accept his basic theory. If only 1 in 1000 (a tenth of a percent of) biologists accepted Darwinian evolution, certainly anyone supporting the scientific movement would consider it a failure, would they not. Austrians have had at least this much time in propagating their views. You explain it why it`s not a failure in terms of a social movement.

[synestheticmonotony]

@qtutoringhelps You are only comparing time and methodology.You entirely ignore that a great portion of modern economics was build upon the Austrian subjectivist view of value, the definition of goods(and, complimentary goods), the concept of utility, the elaboration of supply vs demand, price theory, etc.Your argument is synonymous with saying that because Newton discovered gravity in the 18th century, that his law is no longer valid. Do you think before you type, or do you spout off on a whim?

[qtutoringhelps]

@synestheticmonotony

Well, that's just wrong. A good portion of mainstream economics AND Austrian economics is founded upon concepts from classical economics. Value theories, the definition of a good, the concept of utility, supply/demand, price theory, etc., PRE-DATE Austrian economics.

As for Newton, the comparison would be that only 1 in 1000 physicists associate themselves with Newtonian physics. (I'm talking about the movement itself, not whether the ideas are true.)

[Moragauth]

@qtutoringhelps Austrian conception of MUTV is very different to the classical cost theory of value and even more vastly different from the labour theory. Even the formulation of the MUTV adopted by Walras and Jevons and Menger differ. So no, he isn't wrong. One can go even further back to the proto-economists of Salamanca to find ideas in economics divergent from the classical mainstream.

[qtutoringhelps]

@Moragauth

Who do you consider the first Austrian economist to be? I don't know the scope of your terms here.

[Moragauth]

@qtutoringhelps The first explicitly Austrian economist is Menger. The concepts the school uses and some of its insights go back to the Spanish Scholastics, and in some cases further back to Aristotle, but they find more complete expression in the former. As well as Say and Bastiat.

[qtutoringhelps]

@Moragauth

I'm not saying the concepts Austrians use are not different from previous concepts, I'm saying they have historical precedents.

[synestheticmonotony]

@qtutoringhelps None of those were in the subjectivist realm. In Classical econ there was cardinal utility, there was the LTV, goods weren't based upon subjective value, price theory was based on natural and effective prices (and, the LTV), demand was split between effective and absolute demand, etc. Sure, they had theories about the things that I listed, but they aren't those used in economics today; the marginal revolution turned Classical econ on its head.

[synestheticmonotony]

@qtutoringhelps I will give you one thing, many of these ideas did predate the Austrians, but they were the ones to put it into a logical framework of economics. Olivi discovered marginal utility in the 13th century, the definition of a good comes from the Greeks (Aristotle I believe), supply and demand can be traced back to Hesiod but was more fully elaborated by Lessius. There are also guys like Cantillon, Torgot, Aquinas, etc that talked of these things,Austrians put it all into perspective

[Coveryourassetsnow]

@synestheticmonotony Austrians NAIL it with the praxeologlical approach. Other schools of Econ really dont complete the regressus in infinitum approach, and they attempt to compare Austrians to other schols using their incomplete analysis. Austrians complete this analysis, at least in the world of Economics. Von Mises admitted that he was not focused on WHY we have some goods in a higher utility ranking than others--his point was that Humans Act and built his case in "Human Action".

[Distortion0]

@Coveryourassetsnow You haven't said anything of substance here. In so many words you've simply said "I think Austrian Economics is better than every other school because...."

[Coveryourassetsnow]

@Distortion0 Actually I did make my case and added substance by referencing the praxeological approach. The regressus in infinitum approach is mentioned in "Human Action". The deeper understanding of Praxeology is why they are better. Ludwig von Mises laid his case on Praxeology in "Human Action" and Carl Menger's work with "Principles of Economics".

[Distortion0]

@Coveryourassetsnow You haven't explained, at all, why you think praxeology "completes' infinite regress in a way that other approaches don't. Counter-assertion does not equal refutation. Now you're simply saying "Austrian Economics uses praxeology, other approaches don't, therefor they're inferior." Which is just a complicated way of saying "I don't like the other guys." I've read Menger's work and it's nothing but the assertion of commonly believed economic dogmas.

[Coveryourassetsnow]

@Distortion0 You have too much time on your hands. If you are seeking a debate go somewhere else. This is silly. Good luck. 

[Distortion0]

@Coveryourassetsnow There's nothing to be gained from debating with you. I just wanted to point out how incredibly stupid your comment was.

[Reckless3057]

@Distortion0 Just so you know Praxeology was developed by Ludwig Von Mises and (some say) is best represented by Rothbard (man, state and the economy). reading Menger will give you some of the basis (as he started the subjectivity revolution) but not the whole vision. Kind of like reading the forward but not chapter 1 of a book. I would highly recommend Human Action and Man, State and the Economy if you really want an understanding of what Praxeology is.

[stealthswimmer]

@Coveryourassetsnow

Mainstream economists these days (at least some) do use praxeology. They use a priori theory and then use empirical work when theory shows counteracting forces at play (because in those cases, theory can't tell you what will happen since it won't tell you which effect dominates the other, and it doesn't solve anything to merely count the number of forces at play because each one may have different magnitudes).

[Moragauth]

@qtutoringhelps Do you have a logical objection to the school or are you here to pointlessly bitch?

[qtutoringhelps]

@Moragauth

Many logical objections, starting with the foundation. But I wouldn't go to you try to resolve them.

[qtutoringhelps]

@Moragauth

Perhaps in a video, but praxeology is a big topic and I'd have to go line-by-line through Mises, which is of limited interest.

[Moragauth]

@qtutoringhelps If you say so...

[qtutoringhelps]

@Moragauth

I don't think it's pointless or an act of bitching to consider why the Austrian school is such a failure in terms of its overall impact on the culture. It's actually quite an important thing to investigate.

[Moragauth]

@qtutoringhelps Again define "failure". It has been investigated in some articles on the Mises site why it doesn't penetrate very deeply, part of the reason being social sciences are not *shock horror* natural sciences and therefore are judged on different parametres than those... and also of course the vested interests of many professional economists, they being the intellectual cover of the modern state and its apologists in all forms and shapes.

[coreythecreeper]

@qtutoringhelps Austrian economics has the somewhat unique problem of advocating less power. By definition, economic policies are enacted by those in power. Many people do not want to lose the power they currently have, and often want to obtain more, so they will be reluctant to enact policies which by design limit and remove their power. That is one reason why we do not see Austrian economics being very mainstream.

[qtutoringhelps]

@coreythecreeper

Scientists like Galileo faced far more state power (backed by irrational Church doctrine) with fewer freedoms than do contemporary Austrian economists, yet such scientists prevailed in overturning centuries of dogma.

[coreythecreeper]

@qtutoringhelps I don't think Galileo had quite the same problem. The things that he espoused, from what I understand, posed a threat to the intellectual stranglehold that state and Church had over people, but I don't think his theories on the nature of the cosmos explicitly called for a reduction of state power. I don't think there was any actual policy change that he wanted implemented.

[qtutoringhelps]

@coreythecreeper

People will accept reductions in state power, as they accepted reductions in Church power, if they accept the fundamental ideas upon which such reductions are based. What you seem to be saying is that economic vested-interest is primary; it is not. Ideas are primary; human action follows from philosophic ideas. If a man accepts the idea that the initiation of force is evil, he will act on that premise, not act on the opposite premise because it might enlarge his bank account.

[qtutoringhelps]

@coreythecreeper

... what the Austrians get wrong (although they get many things right in economics) is deeper philosophic premises. If you accept rational self-interest as advocated by Ayn Rand, capitalism follows easily from that.

[coreythecreeper]

@qtutoringhelps You said that people will accept reductions in state power. Ok, where is that? In fields even other than economics. Let's look at social liberties. There is no argument for the illegal status of gay marriage, and every argument for its legalization. Why has it taken so long then? Man will act on philosophical premises only to the extent that he accepts them. If a man has not accepted that the initiation of force is evil, he will initiate force.

[coreythecreeper]

That he has not accepted that premise does not give us grounds to critique it. If Austrians have faulty philosophic premises, address those premises, not their reception.

[synestheticmonotony]

@qtutoringhelps I guess that you have not been keeping up with the more contemporary trends in economic thought. More than likely, you aren't even aware of historical examples of economic thought, many of which were only to be rediscovered centuries later. I can only guess that you aren't an economist, and if you are, that you have not lent your time to the study of historical economic observations. Philosophy is one thing, but economics is quite a specialized science in human reason.

[qtutoringhelps]

@synestheticmonotony

Attacking me doesn't change the fact that Austrian economics is virtually unknown. You might want to consider WHY that is.

[synestheticmonotony]

@qtutoringhelps It isn't an attack, it is an observation (more of an assumption, really) of your ignorance of the subject matter. There is quite a difference. Austrianism isn't anymore virtually unknown in the economic sphere any more that economic science is unknown in the minds of the public. Many economists deal with Austrian concepts everyday, even if they don't know it. Further, Austrian econ is having a very strong resurgence, it is even being mentioned in many popular publications.

[qtutoringhelps]

@synestheticmonotony

Again, calling me ignorant without testing me extensively on the subject matter is tantamount to an insult. I am simply referring to the 1 in 1000 statistic. Feel free to carry on with your delusions.

[PrivateAckbar]

@qtutoringhelps No.

[DunbarConfederalist]

He literally broke the book? What did Ben ben bernanke do, crack it over his head?

[petewalker274]

"Economists rank lower in public opinion polls than Congress."

[roboeco]

@petewalker274 ISN'T IT TRUE THAT PERV P$AUL IS CLEARLY JUST THE PUPPET OF AUSTRIAN JINOs? IS'NT ALSO TRUE THAT EUROPEAN JINOs ARE SAID TO HAVE CONCEIVED HITLER IN A SABBATEAN SEXUAL RITUAL ON TISHA BAV? YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH ALL THAT WITHOUT THE NEED TO LOOK A LITTLE DEEPER? YOU CANT TELL HE KNOWS NOTHING OF WHAT HE SPEAKS REGARDING AUSTRIAN MUMBO JUMBO & IS TOTALLY RELYING ON AUSTRIAN JINOs FOR ALL HIS POSITIONS, WHEN A REAL ROBOTIC ECONOMY IS WHAT WE REALLY NEED? goo.gl / wH0rg

[msungs]

Either Osama Ben Bernanke or ''Owe''bama didn't like this. You can't print wealth. Wealth comes from hard work, savings, postponing instant gratifications, and a myriad of other reasons. The US(S)A now turns on the Federal Reserve as ''Federal'' as Federal Express money presses and tries to do what every failing empire has tried to do before it, print your way out of your problems. Eventually it causes run-away inflation. I already left the US(S)A with my capital, languages, and drive.

[Leofus1986]

This would be a great introduction to Austrian economics for a newcomer.

[orthzar]

What I got from this:

1) Deflation is natural and makes entrepreneurship easier and less expensive. Mark didn't mention it, but I bet he would say that inflation is just as natural as inflation.

2) Mainstream economists are afraid of a free market, an unmixed or non-command economy, based on the mainstream fear of deflation as well as inflation.

3) If there had been no bail-outs, the recession would already be over.

Austrian economics, realistic and unheard of

[zalida100]

Excellent - Thanks

[JusticeSpray]

J'aime merci beaucoup

[Paetaor]

We're all going to be Great Depression experts soon enough.

Thanks Ben et al.