Frustration With Austrian Economics
Uploader Comments (zthustra)
All Comments (59)
-
This guy doesn't seem to have anything to say.
-
What's up with the religious analogies? As far as I'm concerned this is science if unfortunately of the dismal variety (lots of interacting variables). I'm an atheist, yes... but I don't see how that has any bearing on the dialogue. Just ends up being a whole lot of flowery language.
-
I think you have to be very careful with your titles and language. You don't want them to come off like the general news media, as just inflammatory, oversimplified and ambiguous to who you are attacking. Mises, Rothbard & Hayek represent Austrian theology (U talk about praxeology, so arent completely ignorant)..Yet if u had made a distinction in the video, you would have saved me a lot of time. U admit that u didn't realize their contribution to boom theory.. so maybe I have educated a little.
-
I will check out Econostories.tv ... looks interesting. It is worth noting that I don't consider myself pro-Keynes or anti-Hayek or anything like that. I'm frustrated by pretty much all the economist-type people.
I remember learning about Keynes in college and really getting frustrated by how some of the really bright observations he made about human behavior were being used by government to get us to spend saving and borrow money.
Thanks for the link!
-
I can't say that I ever had an online exchange with Hayek or Mises, they don't seem to posting at YouTube these days (grin).
I can't bring myself to get into a religious debate about economics. I understand that Hayek and Mises are prophets of the church but I think it is more important to engage with living people and what they are saying.
GOLD! GOLD! GOLD!
I suppose I should try and read something from Hayek one day, I did read some Mises when I was younger.
-
@dmg46664 I meant ordinal rather than cardinal
Part 4 : There is no reason you can't be mindful of all economic schools mentioned... they all have some valid points. You may happen to have arguments with ignorant people that have some Austrian views. To call Austrians Racist, or say say that Austrians = Goldbugs.... means you owe an apology to the Austrian theories which you clearly haven't read. Similarly misunderstood... Keynes is not Socialism, and Marx never denied the productive power of the free market, just had a problem with distri.
dmg46664 1 year ago
@dmg46664
My problem is not with the volumous Austrian school of thought which is largely a mystery to laymen and atheist alike, it is with the outspoken, sel-described and assumed Austrians that engage me on a frequent basis in comments and replies to the video. These people are real and they are frustrating and there is no way to get past their dogmatic and religious adherence to the doctine of GOLD, GOLD GOLD.
To suggest that I have an argument with Mises or Hayek is a misstatement.
zthustra 1 year ago
Part 3: The real value of the Austrian school, and the reason it's back in vogue, is that where as Keynes and the Monetarists (Friedman) prescribe methods of dealing with the Bust, it's the Austrians alone that say the problem was with the Boom! Again see Econstories.tv . Their explanation of the Great Dep, was not like others, interest rate rises (Friedman) in 1929 or fiscal (Keynes). Instead it was the ROARING 20s and crazy inc in prices. So they propose policies to slow this down. Makes sense
dmg46664 1 year ago
@dmg46664
One of the first comments you posted that I mostly agree with. I agree with the part about booms leading to busts, but I don't think I have ever had a self-described or assumed Austrian even go in that direction with discussion. It must be one of the sectarian doctrines reserved for the divine?
I promise to watch Econostories.tv soon. Thanks for sticking with this thread of comments and please forgive my sarcastic sense of humor.
We have to talk more about the boom issue.
zthustra 1 year ago
Part 2: It's a myth that Austrians reject mathematical models. See this very insightful post tinyurl-dot-com-slash-2923vcr (READ IT!) . Austrians don't believe you can assign an ordinal number to utility to compare preference. So they rejected the neo-classical utility curve and favour a cardinal approach (believe in an ordered list of preferences only). I think that for the individual they are correct, but for groups the neo-classicals add value.
dmg46664 1 year ago
@dmg46664
That was difficult! It was like asking an atheist to read the liturgical sermon of a Methodist explaining the problems with Presbyterians.
Still, some expressions were used that I was unfamiliar with and I will recognize them later as subjects more apprpriate to mysticism and theology than to common sense.
My favorite economist was Will Rogers!
zthustra 1 year ago