Anyone here who formally studied economics after getting into Austrian economics?

LawnWake

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
1,081
I am considering going to university next year to study economics, but with a background in Austrian economics (as a layman), how comparable is the Austrian perspective to the general mainstream perspective and how much do you gain from studying mainstream economics? Is it an enjoyable study still?
 
I am considering going to university next year to study economics, but with a background in Austrian economics (as a layman), how comparable is the Austrian perspective to the general mainstream perspective and how much do you gain from studying mainstream economics? Is it an enjoyable study still?

What university?
 
Certainly microeconomics is still very enjoyable, particularly if you like math. Some concepts discussed by Austrian economists are also part of mainstream microeconomics, such as the concept of diminishing marginal utility (as you know, proposed by Menger). Overall micro isn't as politicized, but still has important applications.

I may lose some of my libertarian cred here, but I've personally enjoyed my college macro courses more than the micro ones. This is probably because I have found that the professor quality is higher. I've been fortunate enough to have a lot of econ professors from the former USSR who have generally presented more of an anti-governmental-interference viewpoint. I also had a Chinese macro prof who used to play Ron Paul videos in class when we discussed monetary policy, though she was pretty noncommittal when I got up the nerve to ask her if she agreed with Ron, haha. In addition I generally find policy questions to be more interesting than the nuts and bolts of micro, though I have not taken any specialized micro courses.
 
^ Funny you say that, because I had a intermediate level macro prof who was form Russia (a younger woman) and she once said, in all seriousness, that the USPS is a good reason for more govt unions in the US.
 
I've heard EXCELLENT things about Northwood University in Midland, MI. Consider going there and studying economics if you can find the loot. Their curriculum is amazing beyond belief.
 
From what I understand, none of the macro models get everything right. Including the Austrians. You should be able to learn tons of quality economics just about anywhere at the undergraduate level. You can always refine your choices for a masters or Ph.D if you happen to pursue that.

I think George Mason University in Virginia is one of the most prominent "free market" programs. Several of their alumni teach at San Jose State University in California. The department chair at San Jose State has referred to her department as the only free market economics department on the west coast.



Hummel is discussed briefly here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Confederate

 
Last edited:
^ Funny you say that, because I had a intermediate level macro prof who was form Russia (a younger woman) and she once said, in all seriousness, that the USPS is a good reason for more govt unions in the US.

YMMV. One of the worst professors I ever had in terms of politics was my intermediate micro prof. He was the epitome of the DC Establishment (attended Sidwell Friends School, then various universities in the DC area). His age may have also been a factor. The Soviet profs I had were all at Auburn, which has a fairly conservative-leaning econ department and is, as I found out, a high-quality program compared to many alternatives. (I'm at Temple in Philly now.)
 
The problem with a lot of macroeconomics topics, at least on the "cutting edge" of macroeconomic theory, is that the question posed is "what kind of government intervention policies can we enact in order to improve X economic condition?" There's always near-infinite possibilities that can be explored and people who come up with theories get recognized as great scholars. If only there were equal recognition reserved for those who show that intervention is not the solution...
```
 
Back
Top