Has anyone read this critique of the Austrian School?

[xyz123]

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-ausintro.htm

 

[wizardwatson]

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-ausintro.htm

What do you think? Under close scrutiny, the Austrian School of Economics doesn't seem very credible.

Austrian economics is to economics what Jeet Kune Do is to martial arts. And in this vein it is very easy to see why it is attacked by classical economists.

This is also good to keep in mind.

Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousandfold by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics or medicine-the special pleading of selfish interests. While every group has certain economic interests identical with those of all groups, every group has also, as we shall see, interests antagonistic to those of all other groups. While certain public policies would in the long run benefit everybody, other policies would benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The group that would benefit by such policies, having such a direct interest in them, will argue for them plausibly and persistently. It will hire the best buyable minds to devote their whole time to presenting its case. And it will finally either convince the general public that its case is sound, or so befuddle it that clear thinking on the subject becomes next to impossible. -Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Lesson

I've only read part of it, but I've found numerous things already I disagree with.

 

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

It is a poorly written hit piece employing virtually all logical fallacies of discussion.

The "differences" the piece focused on were not the real differences that would actually make the "mainstream" look foolish and show where the Austrians make sense. Most offensive to someone actually interested in studying economics is the references to economics as a science instead of a cult, which would be more accurate. The real differences between current schools of economics are the subjective "truths" that they are based upon, but never discussed.

The Austrians are not without their warts either. The school was developed well before the 100% DEBT-backed fiat currency we are under now. They have not adapted, and seem to ignore the most obvious problem with this. Money does not just get printed out of thin air! It is loaned into existence! The classic notions of inflation are not accurate when the "debt reserve" keeps sucking money out of existence.

 

[eric_cartman]

troll

 

[Ilhaguru]

I think it is abundantly clear that there are numerous disagreements within libertarianism and especially within the Libertarian Party.

We don't know everything, after all. Still lots to find out. So with that in mind, always keep an open mind.

 

[rapidtrends]

Have not read it, dont care to read it.

Why?

Because a statue was never erected to a critic.

Armchair quarterbacks do not impress me.

Never ceases to amaze me how people will make commentary on something they have never done, or been personally responsible for.

People who have never run a gold bullion operation have no problems trying to explain to me how one should be run.

Cracks me up every time.

Big difference between a person who complains about how another person is climbing Mount Everest...and the guy who is actually climbing it.

 

[wizardwatson]

troll

+1

Probably right with the one post and all. But check out this gem from the source document of the Austrian critique document:

Myth: I earned that money; it's mine!
Fact: The free market in which people make their money wouldn't even exist without government support.

HA! Talk about the cart before the horse!


Here's the source document: http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/LiberalFAQ.htm
Here's the myth link above quote is from: http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-earnedmoney.htm

Feel free to get your fill of ignorance from the above links.

 

[FountainDew]

every system has its criticisms. The only problem is that the critic can never provide factual data since its illegal to toy around with the world economy. So really only a very select few get that kind of chance, and one of them is Alan Greenspan. Everyone's school thinks they're the right choice for the economy mainly because their computer models say so, and the fact that its near impossible to prove them wrong.

 

[Bruno]

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-ausintro.htm

What do you think? Under close scrutiny, the Austrian School of Economics doesn't seem very credible.

You created an RPF account with an incredibly clever name just for the purpose spewing some anti-Austrian School blather?

Slow Sunday morning your life, huh?

 

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

Maybe he is the author of the article desperately trying to get some precious hits so he can get paid.

 

[bill50]

Even though its not meant to attack Keynesian economics, the best book to really show how wrong mainstream economics is is the book Economics In One Lesson by Henry Haslitt. After reading the book you'll see how mainstreamers fail to look beyond the immediate results of their intervention to fully understand the consequences of their actions.

People think mainstream economics work because it often produces immediate positive results in the area the policy was meant to affect. The negative effects that the policies cause are not as apparent or take years to become noticeable.

That and mainstream economics allow politicians a means to offer people something that is impossible and justifies the existence of the politicians. Politicians are the ones who decide who gets the grants and the funding to continue their study.

Austrian economics is to mainstream economics as astronomy is to astrology .

 

[Met Income]

Why is xyz a troll?

 

[Danke]

Why is xyz a troll?

axy123 is offline now, hold your question until the troll returns and ask him directly.

 

[Bossobass]

All I need to know is:

With one system there could be no $10 trillion in debt, which is sucking the life out of the US economy, and...

The money I saved all of my life would be worth the same as it was when I saved it.

The rest is philosophical bullshit.

Heeding the Rothschild's Ivy League propagandists always reminds me of an important life experience:

In 1971 I had just graduated high school. I received a gold coin. A month later, I met a middle aged man of means who was selling all of his real estate holdings, some of them to my father.

He told me the coin had a fixed value of $35 and thus it would be worth the same amount years from then. He offered to buy it from me for $50 because, he said, he liked to collect gold coins.

Years later I heard that he was a member of the JBS and was hip to the demise of the Bretton/Woods gold standard (which happened a month after his offer to buy my coin) so he liquidated his real estate holdings and bought gold.

That gold coin was worth $800 just 9 years later.

It's the same as the central bankers today (through their propaganda machine) telling everyone that gold as money is an ancient relic and today it's only a commodity, while at the same time every one of them holds gold in their safes listed as an asset on their balance sheets.

I like Congressman Paul's idea best. Legalize competing currencies and we'll see which is the better idea. To heck with philosophical blathering. I've had enough of that.

In the old neighborhood was a saying: "Money talks and BS walks". Let them compete and the question will answer itself.

Bosso

 

[Bruno]

All I need to know is:

With one system there could be no $10 trillion in debt, which is sucking the life out of the US economy, and...

The money I saved all of my life would be worth the same as it was when I saved it.

The rest is philosophical bullshit.

Heeding the Rothschild's Ivy League propagandists always reminds me of an important life experience:

In 1971 I had just graduated high school. I received a gold coin. A month later, I met a middle aged man of means who was selling all of his real estate holdings, some of them to my father.

He told me the coin had a fixed value of $35 and thus it would be worth the same amount years from then. He offered to buy it from me for $50 because, he said, he liked to collect gold coins.

Years later I heard that he was a member of the JBS and was hip to the demise of the Bretton/Woods gold standard (which happened a month after his offer to buy my coin) so he liquidated his real estate holdings and bought gold.

That gold coin was worth $800 just 9 years later.

It's the same as the central bankers today (through their propaganda machine) telling everyone that gold as money is an ancient relic and today it's only a commodity, while at the same time every one of them holds gold in their safes listed as an asset on their balance sheets.

I like Congressman Paul's idea best. Legalize competing currencies and we'll see which is the better idea. To heck with philosophical blathering. I've had enough of that.

In the old neighborhood was a saying: "Money talks and BS walks". Let them compete and the question will answer itself.

Bosso

Great story.

You didn't say whether you sold the coin, though.

 

[jyakulis]

man i don't know if this is much of a "critique". it's more like a hit piece. i mean just the first page all the name hurling going on, calling austrians cranks and conspiracy theorists. also, specifically noting how academia doesn't generally accept their ideas. i mean if you are going to write a critique at least do so objectively.

 

[eric_cartman]

Why is xyz a troll?

because it's his first post. so he comes to the forums, signs up for an account, and tries to push his nonsense on us. clearly he is not a ron paul supporter if he just makes an account to try to discredit the Austrian theory of economics.

it's still amazing how people don't believe the austrian school when pretty much the only people who predicted this economic collapse were austrian thinkers. all the traditional economists thought everything was fine, and it was the austrians who were trying to warn everyone.

the video of peter schiff vs. art laugher is a good example of Austrian Economics vs. Mainstream Economics.... and i think we all know who won that bet of a penny.

 

[danberkeley]

because it's his first post. so he comes to the forums, signs up for an account, and tries to push his nonsense on us. clearly he is not a ron paul supporter if he just makes an account to try to discredit the Austrian theory of economics.

it's still amazing how people don't believe the austrian school when pretty much the only people who predicted this economic collapse were austrian thinkers. all the traditional economists thought everything was fine, and it was the austrians who were trying to warn everyone.

the video of peter schiff vs. art laugher is a good example of Austrian Economics vs. Mainstream Economics.... and i think we all know who won that bet of a penny.

Exactly. What ever happened to dinner and a movie. xyz123, signs up and goes stright for the kill.

 

[forsmant]

man i don't know if this is much of a "critique". it's more like a hit piece. i mean just the first page all the name hurling going on, calling austrians cranks and conspiracy theorists. also, specifically noting how academia doesn't generally accept their ideas. i mean if you are going to write a critique at least do so objectively.

+1

What a weak attempt at criticism. A two page hit piece without any attempt to refute Austrian arguments. Worthless.

 

[Malakai]

Can see it is written from a collectivist viewpoint from the first paragraph on.

Collectivists are always going to have problems with the individualist Austrian school.

Just remember that it is free market economics and individualism that America was founded on, and the Austrian school is just a continuation of the understanding and detail of classical liberalism that came about from the renaissance.