The Austrian school is founded on praxecology. The study and logic of actions and their motivation. The theory is everything you need to know about economics you can learn with your eyes closed and sitting down.
People will apply the first unit of a good towards their most valued use for it. This is true of any good, including money. Elastic on inelastic doesn't matter, Austrians cannot predict the particular values people have at any given time but the relation of values to actions holds true.
My guess is that his answer would be competition. But there's a lot about this I don't understand. I wish there was a way to do experimental research that wouldn't be potentially more destructive than what we have now to try some of these things.
I used to be an anarchist in the late 80's but gave it up because I think it one of the millions of ideas that look good on paper but will not work in the real world.
Anarchy deregulates business. Many historical examples of why that does not work. When Thatcher deregulated business in the 70's it created a monster that effected the world wide economy negatively. Google the Enron loophole and see what happened when Bush deregulated the energy sector. What specifically about this works?
You're committing a common equivocation by speaking of corporatism and anarchism interchangeably. This fallacy has been debunked repeatedly by economists and thinkers at least as far back as Frederic Bastiat.
If dairy farmers create a monopoly to inflate the price of milk I can boycott milk. If energy companies create monopolies we are screwed. Even with so called regulation the corporations find enough loopholes to get around it. If this happens in a regulated environment what should we expect from an unregulated environment?
Actually no, there is a limit in place on the price of energy. Solar energy currently cost 200 dollars per barrel of oil energy equivalent, and small wind generators are even cheaper energy.
@crazycatfguy There is far too much nonsense in your post to counter in 500 characters.
But let's start with the obvious:
"The "loophole" was enacted in sections § 2(h) and (g) of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, signed by U.S. president Bill Clinton on December 21, 2000.[1] "
wikipedia(.)org/wiki/Enron_loophole
Sucks when reality isn't on your side, doesn't it?
Claiming proof might have been jumping the gun. However, even if your criticism if valid, Molyneux has still shown this "crippled" anarchy to exist and function. So it seems reasonable to theorize that a less-crippled variant would function to some degree also. What degree? This perhaps renders the argument open, as many variables can be considered, but at some point your counter reduces to absurdity in that nothing can be sufficiently deduced from anything, ever, which I do not believe is true.
Well, deduction is a matter of logic, and if the premisis is flawed, the conclusion may be also. The premesis is presented as a obvious, simple law of nature, and it isn't.
Now what is good, is that there are examples of crippled anarchy, and we need more of them. But his video should not be followed by "QED" which is what he is asserting.
Ouch, I was going to reply to your most recent comment and I deleted it! I didn't intend to!
I think we can accept some analogies as being stronger than others if we acknowledge the strength or weaknesses of the premises and use of logic. He didn't do that. You want to dismiss my complaint because then you think I want to throw out everything, and I don't. Video to follow.
I've been watching your videos for a long time, though I don't know if I can now. Your comments on that 'The Proof For Anarchy' where extremely embarrassing.
I agree that linear progressions are not a logical given, and so the video is not "proof" for anarchism. There could be any number of hidden factors at play that make the relationships between politicians and lobbyists a bad analogy for your average interaction in a anarchistic society.
But the perspective is still a helpful one. Anarchism is not theoretical, and the relationships between politicians and lobbyists are prime examples of how anarchistic relationships spring up among the most adverse of conditions.
shut de fuck up , ur just jealous of sttebot cos hes got a more popular channel
ThePhilosophicalMind 1 year ago
The Austrian school is founded on praxecology. The study and logic of actions and their motivation. The theory is everything you need to know about economics you can learn with your eyes closed and sitting down.
People will apply the first unit of a good towards their most valued use for it. This is true of any good, including money. Elastic on inelastic doesn't matter, Austrians cannot predict the particular values people have at any given time but the relation of values to actions holds true.
WorBlux 3 years ago
What would stop his DROs from forming monopolies and since they control your access to society charging so much that it puts society into poverty?
crazycatfguy 3 years ago
My guess is that his answer would be competition. But there's a lot about this I don't understand. I wish there was a way to do experimental research that wouldn't be potentially more destructive than what we have now to try some of these things.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
Crazycatfguy, there are hundreds of podcasts addressing this and many other criticisms on his site (freedomainradio . com).
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago
I used to be an anarchist in the late 80's but gave it up because I think it one of the millions of ideas that look good on paper but will not work in the real world.
crazycatfguy 3 years ago
Maybe you simply didn't understand, because the ideas are in practice now, and they work.
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago
Anarchy deregulates business. Many historical examples of why that does not work. When Thatcher deregulated business in the 70's it created a monster that effected the world wide economy negatively. Google the Enron loophole and see what happened when Bush deregulated the energy sector. What specifically about this works?
crazycatfguy 3 years ago
You're committing a common equivocation by speaking of corporatism and anarchism interchangeably. This fallacy has been debunked repeatedly by economists and thinkers at least as far back as Frederic Bastiat.
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago 3
If dairy farmers create a monopoly to inflate the price of milk I can boycott milk. If energy companies create monopolies we are screwed. Even with so called regulation the corporations find enough loopholes to get around it. If this happens in a regulated environment what should we expect from an unregulated environment?
crazycatfguy 3 years ago 3
Actually no, there is a limit in place on the price of energy. Solar energy currently cost 200 dollars per barrel of oil energy equivalent, and small wind generators are even cheaper energy.
WorBlux 3 years ago
@crazycatfguy There is far too much nonsense in your post to counter in 500 characters.
But let's start with the obvious:
"The "loophole" was enacted in sections § 2(h) and (g) of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, signed by U.S. president Bill Clinton on December 21, 2000.[1] "
wikipedia(.)org/wiki/Enron_loophole
Sucks when reality isn't on your side, doesn't it?
jeffiek 5 months ago
Man...I miss your videos. Keep 'em coming.
howtofoldsoup 3 years ago
Like throwing gasoline on a fire. Thanks.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
Claiming proof might have been jumping the gun. However, even if your criticism if valid, Molyneux has still shown this "crippled" anarchy to exist and function. So it seems reasonable to theorize that a less-crippled variant would function to some degree also. What degree? This perhaps renders the argument open, as many variables can be considered, but at some point your counter reduces to absurdity in that nothing can be sufficiently deduced from anything, ever, which I do not believe is true.
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago
Well, deduction is a matter of logic, and if the premisis is flawed, the conclusion may be also. The premesis is presented as a obvious, simple law of nature, and it isn't.
Now what is good, is that there are examples of crippled anarchy, and we need more of them. But his video should not be followed by "QED" which is what he is asserting.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
Ouch, I was going to reply to your most recent comment and I deleted it! I didn't intend to!
I think we can accept some analogies as being stronger than others if we acknowledge the strength or weaknesses of the premises and use of logic. He didn't do that. You want to dismiss my complaint because then you think I want to throw out everything, and I don't. Video to follow.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
I don't think you want to throw everything out at all. I do think your criticism can be reduced to that conclusion, for someone so inclined.
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago
Thank you. We are in agreement.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
I've been watching your videos for a long time, though I don't know if I can now. Your comments on that 'The Proof For Anarchy' where extremely embarrassing.
whitepages95 3 years ago
wow, amazing video
EvoLIEtion 3 years ago
...oh, and nice to see you back on the ol' tubes
Luke12000 3 years ago
You're going to see a lot more soon.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago
I agree that linear progressions are not a logical given, and so the video is not "proof" for anarchism. There could be any number of hidden factors at play that make the relationships between politicians and lobbyists a bad analogy for your average interaction in a anarchistic society.
Luke12000 3 years ago
But the perspective is still a helpful one. Anarchism is not theoretical, and the relationships between politicians and lobbyists are prime examples of how anarchistic relationships spring up among the most adverse of conditions.
Luke12000 3 years ago
Thank you, Luke. Your comment is appreciated.
DarwinsHamster 3 years ago