The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Self-Criticism Time: What is the Biggest Problem with Austrianism?

rated by 0 users
This post has 27 Replies | 9 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Posts 237
Points 4,175
garegin replied on Sat, Nov 22 2008 8:14 PM

the fact is that many austrians understand the issue very clearly. i remember block talking about the marxist dude who researched and found out that most regulation was made in the favor of big business. in my opinion, regulation doesnt really curb evil businessmen, it is made up by groups of businessmen with connections and very deep pockets to gain monopoly advantage over others.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 5
Points 130

I have a question. In discussions with friends I often get alot of criticism of the free market. They say that regulation must exist at some level especially in developing nations and economies where the government must nationalize industries and foster development. Is there merit to this? Should smaller and less developed countries that lack natural resources embrace nationalization of industry? I apologize if this question is not in the appropriate thread.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 150
Points 3,590

Solid_Choke:
What is the biggest methodological or theoretical shortcoming of Austrian economics? Also, what should be done to address it?

I think  its major shortcomings are its lack of rigor, formalness, and precision.  The economic theory that Mises, Rothbard, etc. have developed is, I think most of us would agree, correct, but I remember when I first started reading this stuff that I always wondered where the precise unraveling of the implications of human action actually took place.  You always here that "based on the axiom of human action we can logically deduce its many implications and therefore arrive at an aprioristic body of economic theory". 

Although most of what's necessary for a really rigorous economics theory text is present in MES and HA, they don't read anything like I think a logical step by step unraveling of a theory of economics book should read.  Granted that makes them easier and more enjoyable but I think it would beneficial to have something more concise.

Just to give an idea of how it would go:

Provide a precise definition of, e.g., human action (probably similar to Mises).

State the theorem - e.g. all human actors regard time as scarce

Proof: 

Show by contradiction -  Suppose a human acts but that he does not regard time as scarce

Then if time is not scare all ends can be met simultaneously.

If all ends can be met simultaneously than there is no need to choose - i.e. humans do not act.

Contradiction - actors regard time as scarce.

And the book would go from one theorem to the next looking at specific areas, e.g. interpersonal exchange, etc.  and prove each of the theorems.   

It would be like a mathematical analysis book but it would make use of the language already used by Austrians.

Sorry for the long post.  I just wish someone would do this.  It could provide new insights, be refined, show whats apodictic and what's not, etc.  And pretty much every thing needed is already in HA and MES it would just need to be shortened and made formal.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,247
Points 65,050
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Why don't you attempt it then? I see this suggestion a lot and I agree with it (as I said earlier on), but it puzzles me why the proponents of the idea don't get underway with it.

To darkness I condemn you...

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 159
Points 3,490
Fephisto replied on Sun, Nov 23 2008 1:06 AM

Alright, fine, but it's going to take me two years before I feel confident in what I'm doing is correct.

 

Mentioned this before, and there should be a link to a prior attempt of mine to do this on there:  http://mises.org/Community/forums/p/3192/44247.aspx#44247

"Keynesianomics is a Ponzi scheme."

"You are correct in that Capitalism does not help with poverty, because it eliminates poverty altogether..."

"That wonderful strawman:  greed."

Inequality bad. Zip it!Zip it!Zip it!

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 1,691
Points 26,900

SkepticalInquirer:

 Is there merit to this? Should smaller and less developed countries that lack natural resources embrace nationalization of industry?

No.

Start a thread and we can talk specifics, I can't really refute them without knowing more about their claims.

 

 

 

Peace
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 35
Points 650
Forsmant replied on Sun, Nov 23 2008 9:30 AM

I think that arragance in presentation has pushed many away from Austrian theory and libertarianism. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,247
Points 65,050
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

Alright, fine, but it's going to take me two years before I feel confident in what I'm doing is correct.

Time is no constraint in academia. Stick out tongue

To darkness I condemn you...

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 2 of 2 (28 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap