It isn’t a good argument against Austrian economics that someone might come up with a science that made better predictions. You have to show us the science, so that it can be compared with praxeology. Suffice it to say that this hasn’t been done.
Human beings do not exist to be pawns in a game of lockdowns and collective action.
Quantitative methods can't be applied to human action, which is purposeful and not a mere reflex. For this reason, mathematical formulas can only describe events, never explain them.
Choosing between labor and leisure is not like choosing between apples and oranges. Many people like both kinds of fruit. But labor involves disutility, so a better choice is this: between apples and rotten oranges.
If you've wanted to read Human Action, this is your opportunity to hear it explained by great economists and scholars!
Many rich people publicly support measures to "raise taxes on the rich." This is because the cost of voting to give away $1 million is far lower than the cost of actually giving it away.
A given goal dictates the specific means that an individual will choose for the attainment of that end. People make choices that they think will help them achieve an end.
Central planners like Cass Sunstein think our alleged "irrationality" means we need the government to intervene in our daily lives.
It is not a conclusive proof of a doctrine's correctness that its adversaries use the police, the hangman, and violent mobs to fight it. But it is a proof of the fact that those taking recourse to violent oppression are convinced of the untenability of their own doctrines.
Presented at the Mises Institute's "First Annual Advanced Instructional Conference in Austrian Economics" at Stanford University.
