Austrian economics

The line about Cato is a little misleading. At our 28 annual monetary conferences and in our publications, we’ve presented the ideas of many Austrian economists, from our 1979 publication of two classic manuscripts by Hayek, A Tiger by the Tail: The Keynesian Legacy of Inflation and Unemployment and Monetary Policy: Government as Generator of the “Business Cycle” and our first monetary conference in 1982 featuring Fritz Machlup and Gottfried Haberler, to a 1999 issue of the Cato Journal featuring studies of Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, to a new Working Paper, “Has the Fed Been a Failure?” by George Selgin, William Lastrapes, and Lawrence H. White.

And don’t miss a recent BBC program, “Radical Economics: Yo Hayek!” Jamie Whyte spends 30 thoughtful minutes looking at Austrian views of boom and bust, with such guests as White, Papola, Steven Horwitz, Robert Higgs, and Robert Skidelsky.

It took the biggest bubble and crash since 1929 to revive the interest in Austrian economics, but at least now more people are studying the real problems with central planning, government intervention, and money manipulation.



why did you ignore half of what the guy fucking said?
 
The line about Cato is a little misleading. At our 28 annual monetary conferences and in our publications, we’ve presented the ideas of many Austrian economists, from our 1979 publication of two classic manuscripts by Hayek, A Tiger by the Tail: The Keynesian Legacy of Inflation and Unemployment and Monetary Policy: Government as Generator of the “Business Cycle” and our first monetary conference in 1982 featuring Fritz Machlup and Gottfried Haberler, to a 1999 issue of the Cato Journal featuring studies of Hayek and Ludwig von Mises, to a new Working Paper, “Has the Fed Been a Failure?” by George Selgin, William Lastrapes, and Lawrence H. White.

And don’t miss a recent BBC program, “Radical Economics: Yo Hayek!” Jamie Whyte spends 30 thoughtful minutes looking at Austrian views of boom and bust, with such guests as White, Papola, Steven Horwitz, Robert Higgs, and Robert Skidelsky.

It took the biggest bubble and crash since 1929 to revive the interest in Austrian economics, but at least now more people are studying the real problems with central planning, government intervention, and money manipulation.



why did you ignore half of what the guy fucking said?


http://www.cato.org/blog/austrian-economics-news
 
Its a great breakthrough that you are being insulted by being associated with the Austrian school though
 
Here you go desh... Let's see if you can make an intelligent point. I don't think you know what you are talking about and you instead were throwing a fit.

In the other thread you claimed that Austrians make it up as they go. This is rather absurd and contradicts most criticisms of Austrians, including those of Krugman, Klein and other usual critics. They have argued that Austrians are too rigid and fail to change with new data.

As for your point that they are not taken seriously... Hayek won a Nobel.


are they no longer your heros?
 
the entire field of economics uses math the Austrians replace with their philosophy instead of math.

they make it up as they go along depending on what they "believe"
 
yeah slick trick talking the old guy into allowing them to use his name huh

There was no trick. Cato is primarily interested in public policy, not economics, and Friedman was mostly in agreement with them. I don't think Cato has any official stance on the gold standard, but Friedman and Rothbard were in sharp contrast on that.

You have no idea what you are talking about, Desh.
 
bull shit.

It was started by the Koch brothers.

It has an agenda BIG TIME

and it aint uncle miltys ideas
 
what you people need to face is you have been HAD by wealthy people.


all of this crap was designed to rope you into voting against your own interests.


stop being willfully stupid


I know this is off topic but I would like to hear your opinion here. What are own interests are again and what school of economic theory supports them?
 
bull shit.

It was started by the Koch brothers.

It has an agenda BIG TIME

and it aint uncle miltys ideas

How is what you wrote above refuting anything Prof Bax said below?


""There was no trick. Cato is primarily interested in public policy, not economics, and Friedman was mostly in agreement with them. I don't think Cato has any official stance on the gold standard, but Friedman and Rothbard were in sharp contrast on that.

You have no idea what you are talking about, Desh.""
 
Who or what is that in response to?

It's a Springsteen song dumbass! What is with you guys on this board? You are culturally retarded or something. No offense.

Anyway, it goes like this

Prove it all night
Girl there's nothing else that we can do
So prove it all night, prove it all night
And girl I'll prove it all night for you

It's pretty hot!
 
bull shit.

It was started by the Koch brothers.

It has an agenda BIG TIME

and it aint uncle miltys ideas

Yes, it has an agenda, but it's not the promotion of Austrian economics. It is the promotion of ideas held in common with Friedman.

You don't know what you are talking about.
 

Was the purpose of posting this to show that the minimum wage costs jobs?

""Secondary consequences are inevitable. Miriam Lau, a Liberal member of the legislature, says that even at HK$24 an hour, the minimum wage would cost 30,000 jobs, or 1% of the workforce. At HK$32, 170,000 jobs would go, doubling unemployment. Young people and immigrants from China, who are scooped by the territory's abundant restaurants, building sites and cleaning and delivery businesses, would be the likeliest to be out of work. Such industries also employ disabled and older workers on low pay. Subsidies to support such people may have to be expanded if they lose their jobs.""
 
Back
Top