Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We're done here.
We sure are. For an alleged Austrian, you don't even know the literature, we've been down this road before.
Paul Ryan's Other Guru: Friedrich Hayek
Prime Time for Paul Ryans Guru (the One Whos Not Ayn Rand)
As Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney take the stage in Tampa next week, the ghost of an Austrian economist will be hovering above them with an uneasy smile on his face. Ryan has repeatedly suggested that many of his economic ideas were inspired by the work of Friedrich von Hayek
Many of Ryans most famous proposals have clear Hayekian roots. His Roadmap for Americas Future includes calls for government to step out and let the market decide. His proposal to allow citizens to buy whatever health insurance they want, rather than use a government-promoted exchange, also seems to be embedded in the Austrian tradition. In other important ways, though, Ryan is anything but Austrian. While Hayek would laugh at an economic forecast for distant 2013, Ryans budget plan includes predictions about 2083. The congressmans proposal for two separate tax systems a flat-tax system and a loophole-filled tax system is exactly the sort of contradictory governmental problem-solving that Hayek detested.
In actuality, Ryan is like a lot of politicians who merely cherry-pick Hayek to promote neoclassical policies, (THAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM, IMHO) says Peter Boettke, an economist at George Mason University and editor of The Review of Austrian Economics. What Hayek has become, to a lot of people, is an iconic figure representing something that he didnt believe at all, Boettke says. For example, despite his complete lack of faith in the ability of politicians to affect the economy, Hayek, who is frequently cited in attacks on entitlement programs, believed that the state should provide a base income to all poor citizens.
To be truly Hayekian, Boettke says, Ryan would need to embrace one of his central ideas, known as the generality norm. This is Hayeks belief that any government program that helps one group must be available to all. If applied, Boettke says, a Hayekian government would eliminate all corporate and agricultural subsidies and government housing programs, and it would get rid of Medicare and Medicaid or expand them to cover all citizens. (Hayek had no problem with a national health care program.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/m...ans-guru-the-one-thats-not-ayn-rand.html?_r=0
That's because the Austrian School under Ludwig von Mises ran into a pretty big problem. They just knew their economic theories were right, but there was all this pesky data that got in the way which said the opposite. The facts didn't say what von Mises and the other Austrian economists wanted them to say. In the 1940's, Von Mises had a brilliant realization. The problem wasn't with their right, perfect, and holy economic ideas. The problem was that the scientific method doesn't work! And thus, with the sweep of a pen, Von Mises created the "Praxeological Method" where the math always says exactly what the Austrians want it to say.
LOL
Paul Ryan's Magical Economic Worldview: The Austrian School
So because Paul Ryan says a few things that vaguely sound like they might Austrian-ish he's suddenly a part of the Austrian school? Again, where is he on commodity backed private money, the business cycle, ending the Fed, etc... etc... Paul Ryan is far closer to the Chicago school than the Austrian school, but you can't tell the difference without copy and pasting now can you?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Paul Ryan's Other Guru: Friedrich Hayek
Prime Time for Paul Ryans Guru (the One Whos Not Ayn Rand)
As Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney take the stage in Tampa next week, the ghost of an Austrian economist will be hovering above them with an uneasy smile on his face. Ryan has repeatedly suggested that many of his economic ideas were inspired by the work of Friedrich von Hayek
Many of Ryans most famous proposals have clear Hayekian roots. His Roadmap for Americas Future includes calls for government to step out and let the market decide. His proposal to allow citizens to buy whatever health insurance they want, rather than use a government-promoted exchange, also seems to be embedded in the Austrian tradition. In other important ways, though, Ryan is anything but Austrian. While Hayek would laugh at an economic forecast for distant 2013, Ryans budget plan includes predictions about 2083. The congressmans proposal for two separate tax systems a flat-tax system and a loophole-filled tax system is exactly the sort of contradictory governmental problem-solving that Hayek detested.
In actuality, Ryan is like a lot of politicians who merely cherry-pick Hayek to promote neoclassical policies, (THAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM, IMHO) says Peter Boettke, an economist at George Mason University and editor of The Review of Austrian Economics. What Hayek has become, to a lot of people, is an iconic figure representing something that he didnt believe at all, Boettke says. For example, despite his complete lack of faith in the ability of politicians to affect the economy, Hayek, who is frequently cited in attacks on entitlement programs, believed that the state should provide a base income to all poor citizens.
To be truly Hayekian, Boettke says, Ryan would need to embrace one of his central ideas, known as the generality norm. This is Hayeks belief that any government program that helps one group must be available to all. If applied, Boettke says, a Hayekian government would eliminate all corporate and agricultural subsidies and government housing programs, and it would get rid of Medicare and Medicaid or expand them to cover all citizens. (Hayek had no problem with a national health care program.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/m...ans-guru-the-one-thats-not-ayn-rand.html?_r=0
That's because the Austrian School under Ludwig von Mises ran into a pretty big problem. They just knew their economic theories were right, but there was all this pesky data that got in the way which said the opposite. The facts didn't say what von Mises and the other Austrian economists wanted them to say. In the 1940's, Von Mises had a brilliant realization. The problem wasn't with their right, perfect, and holy economic ideas. The problem was that the scientific method doesn't work! And thus, with the sweep of a pen, Von Mises created the "Praxeological Method" where the math always says exactly what the Austrians want it to say.
LOL
Paul Ryan's Magical Economic Worldview: The Austrian School
So because Paul Ryan says a few things that vaguely sound like they might Austrian-ish he's suddenly a part of the Austrian school? Again, where is he on commodity backed private money, the business cycle, ending the Fed, etc... etc... Paul Ryan is far closer to the Chicago school than the Austrian school, but you can't tell the difference without copy and pasting now can you?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Krugman slam-dunked the hacks & their rw voodoo econ theory.All one has to do to discount them is look at its adherents here & IRL such as
Lyin' Ryan (R-WS)
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective: Mises Did Not Predict the US Stock Crash of 1929The Austrian School isn't on the same page about everything. I know that some of their major proponents really aren't doing them any favors with some of the nonsensical things they say at times.
For example, let's take a look at Bob Murphy, an Austrian economist. Here's a guy that tells us he agrees with Keynes that interest rates are purely monetary in nature, then in various interviews he contradicts himself by saying that interest rates are tied to loanable funds, despite the fact he routinely publishes garbage on a continual basis where he contradicts himself and rejects both ideas.
Then we have Austrian business cycle theory (ABCT) which is completely flawed due to its dependence on the Wicksellian natural rate of interest.
It's "flawed" even though Ludwig von Mises is the only economist who predicted the financial panic of 1929.
Yeah, right.
How did the Keynesian quacks do on predicting the financial collapse of 2008?
So because Paul Ryan says a few things that vaguely sound like they might Austrian-ish he's suddenly a part of the Austrian school? Again, where is he on commodity backed private money, the business cycle, ending the Fed, etc... etc... Paul Ryan is far closer to the Chicago school than the Austrian school, but you can't tell the difference without copy and pasting now can you?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
Mises Did Not Predict the US Stock Crash of 1929
I see that someone has dragged up a stupid myth about Mises in one of the comments.
The claim is that Mises predicted that US stock market crash in 1929 and (presumably) the later depression. The source of this nonsense is a story by Fritz Machlup that can be conveniently found in Skousen
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective: Mises Did Not Predict the US Stock Crash of 1929
Weird, the bubble (like Dubya's) happened BECAUSE of cheap and plentiful monies post WW1, when Banksters saw the ability to sell on credit to the stock market, at the same time a housing bubble was created in Cali, NY and Florida that poppeed in 1925-1929.
"Austrian" analysis of the business cycle a crash is always coming.
Marxists said the same thing? AND?
AnonymousMay 30, 2011 at 11:29 PM
It seems that Mises could not predict the Great Depression since praxeology is "not subject to verification and falsification on the ground of experience and facts." In fact, it would seem that if Mises did predict the Great Depression, this would imply that his own theory is incorrect. Perhaps I'm missing something here?
That was yours truly many moons ago, lol. Wow, that's hilarious you posted a thread I commented on so long ago.I actually used to comment on Lord Keynes blog until I joined this place.
If you want a thorough analysis of the Austrian School it can be found here:
Debunking Austrian Economics 101
I still suggest that people familiarize themselves with von Mises, Rothabard and von Hayek, though.
Is this your blog or some other commie's? Why should anyone bother reading a blog about economics that's named "Social Democracy for the 21st Century?" The phrase "socialist economist" is an oxymoron.
It's "flawed" even though Ludwig von Mises is the only economist who predicted the financial panic of 1929.
Yeah, right.
How did the Keynesian quacks do on predicting the financial collapse of 2008?
Mises Did Not Predict the US Stock Crash of 1929
I see that someone has dragged up a stupid myth about Mises in one of the comments.
The claim is that Mises predicted that US stock market crash in 1929 and (presumably) the later depression. The source of this nonsense is a story by Fritz Machlup that can be conveniently found in Skousen
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective: Mises Did Not Predict the US Stock Crash of 1929
Weird, the bubble (like Dubya's) happened BECAUSE of cheap and plentiful monies post WW1, when Banksters saw the ability to sell on credit to the stock market, at the same time a housing bubble was created in Cali, NY and Florida that poppeed in 1925-1929.
"Austrian" analysis of the business cycle a crash is always coming.
Marxists said the same thing? AND?
Your link indicates he did predict the crash. The exact date a bubble collapses is almost impossible to predict because so many variables are involved. However, the Keynesian quacks that you endorse all believe such things can be predicted, no matter how often they fail.
The bubble happened because the Federal Reserve was pursuing a policy of credit expansion. When you artificially increase the money available for loans, you create a credit bubble.
No individual bank can control the supply of credit, so it's ludicrous to claim they all conspired together to do it.
Statist toadies are always trying to blame business for their policy fuck ups.
So because Paul Ryan says a few things that vaguely sound like they might Austrian-ish he's suddenly a part of the Austrian school? Again, where is he on commodity backed private money, the business cycle, ending the Fed, etc... etc... Paul Ryan is far closer to the Chicago school than the Austrian school, but you can't tell the difference without copy and pasting now can you?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
We're done here.
We sure are. For an alleged Austrian, you don't even know the literature, we've been down this road before.
no surprise there. TakeAStepBack is well known for doing fact-averse, drive-bye, ad homs.
We're done here.
We sure are. For an alleged Austrian, you don't even know the literature, we've been down this road before.
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
You mean the credit bubble started under Harding/Coolidge?
The excess capacity fed off of their 'free markets' crap?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
'Hoover was an ardent free market guy'
Actually, YES he was UNTIL reality placed a 2x4 against his head, and like Dubya, he let the myths and fairy tales YOU believe fade into the waste bin of history!
We're done here.
We sure are. For an alleged Austrian, you don't even know the literature, we've been down this road before.
When you can actually back up an assertion instead of simply saying stupid shit like this, we'll be more than just done here. Until that time, you're just throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks. I'm not going to defend any positions against such stupidity.
If anyone ever looked at what FDR did, it dwarfs Hoover's actions. FDR's New Deal proved government spending during recessions helped to spur economic growth. The problem with FDR's approach was his attempts to balance budgets before the depression was completely finished. WWII proved that deficit spending to put people back to work in both the military and private contractors to make war materials broke the high unemployment, and drove demand higher, even during rationing.So because Paul Ryan says a few things that vaguely sound like they might Austrian-ish he's suddenly a part of the Austrian school? Again, where is he on commodity backed private money, the business cycle, ending the Fed, etc... etc... Paul Ryan is far closer to the Chicago school than the Austrian school, but you can't tell the difference without copy and pasting now can you?
First, whether it's Austrian or Chi Boys, ALL your right wing nonsense is nothing but myths and fairy tales.
The Vienna and Chicago schools have foisted a load of baloney on the market that, when made into policy, has led to every major recession, not to mention the Great Depression, since the establishment of economics as a field.
The unfettered market quickly pendulums out of control, suppresses innovation and promotes monopoly
Yes, lets go back to commodity based dollars *shaking head*
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
Right, I forgot Hoover was an ardent free market guy. Never mind that many of the New Deal programs actually started under his administration.
You mean the credit bubble started under Harding/Coolidge?
The excess capacity fed off of their 'free markets' crap?
Yes, because of the Federal Reserve's easy money policies, which has nothing to do with free markets.
You mean the credit bubble started under Harding/Coolidge?
The excess capacity fed off of their 'free markets' crap?
Yes, because of the Federal Reserve's easy money policies, which has nothing to do with free markets.
Weird, I thought those 'private market' guys looked out for their companies own best interests? Why would feds easy money stop them from looking out for their companies best interests?
