Someone slamming Austrian economics

[tangent4ronpaul]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/1...are-wrong-more-spending-will-save-the-economy

His comments section looks rather bare...

-t

 

[Steven Douglas]

He isn't even worth responding to. He's an illiterate leftist moron with a political axe to grind, who doesn't have even a basic understanding of economics (any school). The idiot lost me at his first non-sourced sentence:

Austrians economists would have you believe that demand for goods and services is infinite.

News to me, what kind of claptrap is that? The only economists I know that believe in infinite anything are the non-Austrians, many of whom believe in infinite exponential expansion, infinite economic growth, infinite resources, and the infinite capacity for debasement of a currency with impunity.

As for "demand for goods and services", since he's talking about economics, does he even know that "demand", by any economic school of thought, is based on the willingness AND ABILITY to pay? And how can that be infinite?

 

[rpwi]

It's typical Keynesian nonsense. Reduce a very complicated economy to just aggregate demand and aggregate supply. Using this artificial logic, aggregate spending is paramount as aggregate employment is apparently dependent on this.

A simple thought exercise destroys his hypothesis. If more spending is so wonderful for the economy...then do we need more oil spills? That creates jobs to clean it up. What if we smashed a number of people's windows? That will create jobs for the window repair industry. They will have more money to spend on say restaurants...they in turn will have more money to spend on clothing, etc...we'll all be rich! Or why don't we create mud pies? Plenty of jobs to be created by transporting, constructing and selling these products if only wise-old government will provide a market for them and create jobs. Truly if spending is so key, we could game the system to a much greater degree. Government could create a contract with a private company to buy and resell the same asset a zillion times back and forth! With a computer this would be possible...and we would be all so rich

 

[Swarmed]

Since his argument is based on a strawman (first sentence), the whole article can be disregarded as nonsense. He doesn't understand Austrian economics, in fact it doesn't seem like he understands any economics.

 

[cajuncocoa]

in fact it doesn't seem like he understands any economics.

Most Keynesians don't. At least, they certainly don't understand what part human nature plays in the equation.

 

[seraphson]

Most Keynesians don't. At least, they certainly don't understand what part human nature plays in the equation.

Oh they certainly understand what part human nature plays. Just take it from the founder himself:

"In the long run we are all dead." - Keynes

Talk about about a solid foundation to build upon an entire school of economic thought.

 

[LibertyEagle]

He is still stuck on the false belief that it is spending that creates a healthy economy, vs savings.

 

[pochy1776]

He is still stuck on the false belief that it is spending that creates a healthy economy, vs savings.

If I have to talk to another economic illiterate who thinks government is the solution thanks to taking a "course" in economics, I WILL KILL SOMEONE.

 

[Jon311]

I still find it laughable that various news sources view economists like Krugman in high regard... smh

 

[VIDEODROME]

As an article trying to refute Ron Paul it is incomplete.

For the the casual reader it leaves unanswered and unasked questions about where the money comes from for the government to spend. More spending has different consequences. Maybe it's through inflation or more borrowed money. More honest liberals would say just raise taxes on the rich.


This gets to the part that is still murky for me. I think inflation causes a wealth transfer to the upper class and leads to the upsetting wealth gap and shrinking middle class. This is followed by a solution of raising taxes on the rich to spend on road construction or grant it to small municipalities to hire more firemen and police.

This is like a viscous circle and I'm not sure what the consequences are. I think the problem is "Stimulus" jobs probably are not enough to significantly help people afford more Widgets again. It can only try to ease the economic pain by keeping people employed.

So I think if you raise taxes on the rich to employ people with stimulus spending the middle class will shrink and all that will grow is the Government.

 

[dannno]

I'm not diggin the 300 character limit..

 

[Neil Desmond]

He isn't even worth responding to. He's an illiterate leftist moron with a political axe to grind, who doesn't have even a basic understanding of economics (any school). The idiot lost me at his first non-sourced sentence:



News to me, what kind of claptrap is that? The only economists I know that believe in infinite anything are the non-Austrians, many of whom believe in infinite exponential expansion, infinite economic growth, infinite resources, and the infinite capacity for debasement of a currency with impunity.

As for "demand for goods and services", since he's talking about economics, does he even know that "demand", by any economic school of thought, is based on the willingness AND ABILITY to pay? And how can that be infinite?

I agree that demand cannot be infinite: http://neiltalk.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-concept-of-infinite-demand-is.html

Here's an article on it: http://www.electroiq.com/articles/s...dustry-forum/the-myth-of-infinite-demand.html

 

[arsenius]

Editing

Austrians economists would have you believe that demand for goods and services is infinite.

He's not even talking about Austrian Economists. Everyone knows Austrians Economists are full of bunk!

Seriously, he can't even be bothered to check his article for basic grammar. I don't think he says anything of substance.