The Austrian School of Economics | Jörg Guido Hülsmann

[fab006]

Am I hearing things, or does Jeffrey Tucker pick up the German accent XD

[phroto13]

two monsters of intellect engaged in an acapella duet

[PanzerDivisionBOM]

@silvercelli

Even granting all of your assertions regarding class conflict (which is something the Austrians dispute, BTW)...

Since when is sporadic intervention only through pacifistic means more social-Darwinistic than forceful, systematic intervention to favour one group of people at the expense of another?

[CernelJoson]

@silvercelli The government enforces a cartel and allows banks to create money from nothing. "Too big to fail" has been the modus operandi of the Federal Reserve since 1913, since the reason for the Fed was to act as "lender of last resort", in other words, to bail out banks.

If regulation X is harmful and regulation Y mitigates that harm to some extent, it's nonsense to say that repealing regulation Y is "deregulation" since without regulation X the problem wouldn't even exist.

[CernelJoson]

@CernelJoson Furthermore, you don't seem familiar with the problem of central planning which applies as much to "regulation" as it does to a full command economy. How do the regulators know which regulations are the "right" ones? Who regulates the regulators?

The market entails a process of discovery, to determine which activities work better than others. Imposing a one-size-fits-all plan only hampers that discovery process and leads to stagnation. State planning is akin to creationism.

[TenTonHorse]

@silvercelli Everyone works in their self-interest. Giving to the poor is working in one's self-interest since you are fulfilling a desire to see a person be happier or better off. A society which values self-ownership of a person's body sees a bully using force as illegitimate. And I don't believe in moral obligations, but would I like to help the weak? Sure, but not by extorting another person's property. But I can go into why I believe the weak (or poor) would be better off in a total market.

[TenTonHorse]

@silvercelli So being sarcastic and strawmanning equals good argumentation? Here, let's just allow the state to arbitrarily define regulations and grow government to a size which would humble the Soviets. Liberalism = Communism?

You haven't presented any arguement worth considering. You didn't even attempt to refute the content of my comment. Just responses based on holistic and emotive concepts.

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli The banks wouldn't need a bailout if the government had more control over them? So evry time something screws up the government should either take it over or bail it out? How about you stop advocating force and coercion?

Governments have no right to tell people how to run their businesses or their lives. The only time government even comes close to legitimate is when it is protecting people's property, not invading or controling it.

[gergenheimer]

@silvercelli Regulations are irrelevant - the entire economy wouldn't have "needed" a bailout if the Fed hadn't flooded it with trillions of dollars of cheap credit. If regulations had been tighter in certain areas, the tsunami of money simply would've found some other avenue of speculation. This is what happens when prices, especially the interest rate, are tampered with - this is the source of the boom-bust cycle in its entirety.

[TenTonHorse]

Glass Steagall myth - commercial banks couldn't underwrite corporate securities under GS, but if this act had remained, the banks could still have underwritten securities exempt from this act, such as municipal bonds or agency securities. So instead of the crisis affecting a few big firms, it would affect several different firms. Also, the FDIC was still in place and this insurance caused excessive risk-taking, so all GS would have done would have made the firms do the risk-taking elsewhere.

[polevaultrockstr]

@silvercelli Also what about the millions who starved to death under Mao? Did they get to vote? Were they not communist? Do you have ONE example of a communist society that has ever worked? It doesn't improve lives, it lowers the standard of living for all but the most wealthy down to be equal with the poor. Yay we are all equal!

[polevaultrockstr]

@silvercelli during world war II than in all of the Great Depression. You still think that war is what made america great? You cite the things that are bleeding the money out of america, the exact opposite of profit.

[polevaultrockstr]

@silvercelli Compare The US and Cuba, what a silly comparison picking people with some of the lowest productivity in the world and comparing them to a country that steals from everyone in order to provide meager things "to everyone." How did the common American gain from the vast taxation and waste of the world wars? You must believe in the broken window fallacy, where so long as we are making "stuff" we as a whole are doing better. You forget that to go to war, Americans had less spending money

[DenmarkRadar]

@silvercelli

Just how would you have that happen...

Government approval of proposed financial mergers? Forced de-mergers/sell-offs?

Government regulation of lending? Required financial reserves? Accounting standards?

Required reporting of credit risk? Market risks? Assets & Liabilities?

Government Sponsored Entities to stabilize the financial markets?

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli Bailing out the banks played a much mroe important role.

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli Like everyone inthe west I benefit from the cheaper goods coming from china. Even if you don't buy them you still benefit as labour and capital here is diverted away from the goods the Chinese produce and into things they don't. I personally think communism should end in China as I believe in individualism, whats YOUR arguement against Chinese communism?

[Mechanized0]

@silvercelli It is quite extraordinary that individuals make the completely misguided charge that laissez-faire created the current economic situation. Considering that the Federal Registry (all regulations on the market) actually increased during the Bush administration and are currently sitting at 80,000 pages of regulations it would be significantly more accurate to describe the present system as soft economic fascism.

The television set is not the place to receive an economic education.

[EconomicLiteracyNow]

@Mechanized0

"The television set is not the place to receive an economic education."

Maybe it SHOULD be. Economics cannot be left to the sole jurisdiction of all of the mis-educated Harvard, Princeton and Columbia Ph.D.s who continue to KNOW what just isn't so. Austrian economics isn't difficult for laypeople to understand, but they haven't been exposed. It won't be taught in our schools. The public needs to stop thinking of "the economy" as a mysterious machine outside their control.

[Distortion0]

@Mechanized0 Market Fundamentalism created the current crisis. Greenspan pumped money into the economy by keeping reserve rates low while the economy was in a boom. Investors turned their credit into assets by buying houses, shoring up demand with false advertising and then selling off their risk. This turned into a ponzi scheme which finally broke about two decades later due econ lag. Greenspan justified this by saying that markets can handle anything.

[weho1]

@Mechanized0 What a simple minded observation. I'm sure U R correct the number of pages of regulations may have increased significantly under the criminal Bush/Cheney Administration, but that in of itself means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. The question is what was the CONTENT, and INTENT of these "80,000 pages of regulations" that according to you Bush/Cheney added. We know some had to do with recinding the U.S. Constituion, Bill of Rights, and making War Crimes Legal. So what exactly was your point?

[Hashishin13]

@silver Austrians DONT BELIEVE IN TOO BIG TO FAIL. Also saying that they "deregulated" is more then a bit misleading, the news is being very dishonest to you. They rolled back one layer of regulations in a market that is about 10+ layers deep. If they actually "deregulated" there would be no regulations left, and there are still tons. As I said before they have "regulated" people from doing "hostile takeovers" which would clean these overpayed CEOs out of their corporations and benefit everyone.

[Hashishin13]

Stefan Molyneaux is a self employed philosopher

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli SLAVE LABOUR UNDER THE COMMUNISM that YOU are espousing? I want freedom for all.

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli They wouldn't justify huge bonuses to CEOs because the system we live under ignores the Austrian school entirely. The only way those CEOs are getting huge bonuses while their company dies is because they are being propped up and handed money to by the government.

Also te government has regulations which prevent "hostile takeovers" which are bascially some guy replacing corrupt over payed CEOs with new more efficient ones who benefit share holders.

Government is criminal, it steals

[Hashishin13]

@silvercelli What the hell are you talking about? Millions and millions starved to death in the Ukraine, and there wasn't any hurricane or earthquake to blame it on, it was solely the socialists in charge stealing everyone's grain production.

Who is profiting from Iraq? Did you get a check that I missed? Oil prices have gone UP since Iraq. The only people profiting are the politically connected elites. Just like the only people who rode around in Mercedes in the USSR, the political elites.

[TenTonHorse]

@silvercelli No Austrian these "imperial conquests", and the huge extortion of resources in these wars harms pretty much everyone outside of the military industrial complex, and perhaps oil, but again no Austrian would be supportive of these institutions or their actions. And going back to your example of CEO's receiving massive bonuses, no Austrian would support bailing out or subsidising any business, and any CEO who takes out more than he puts into a business probably will fail.

[TenTonHorse]

@TenTonHorse No Austrian "supports" these.......

[DKshad0w]

@silvercelli And the poor gets richer, even in this corporatised system.

[msungs]

@silvercelli I have to adamantly disagree with your ascertation. I was born in the former United States of America (I say that not light-heartedly, the US is a lost cause and is turning to banking-state-style-fascism). I now live in the heart of former Communism...East Berlin. These people were locked behind an iron curtain, told how many rooms they could have in their apartment, what car they could drive, what they could learn, and how much fruit they could eat. They wanted ''success''.

[OrganicTory]

Merci!

[moonreft]

@silvercelli success is never done alone. Have you maybe considered the people employed to make the feat possible? Exclude the worthless paper shufflers of course.

[DKshad0w]

@silvercelli "millions of people must suffer to achieve this "success"." The economy is not a zero sum game.

[msungs]

Do you want to know in a nutshell why the US economy is doomed to failure besides all the printing by the Federal Reserve as ''Federal'' as Federal Express...just look at the view counter. Something this informative, educational, and entertaining has less than 100 views, but look at Lady Gaga or other trash like Lil Wayne. The Americans deserve what they get which is the melt down of the Dollar and economy. I am glad I found Peter Schiff and Ron Paul and the Mises Institute and left the USSA

[Hashishin13]

@msungs Where did you go? People are dumb and getting robbed from all over, so where did you go that is better?