Mises Wire

Learning the history of economic thought is important not because every economist has been right, but because we can learn from their mistakes.

Although it doesn't explain everything, it's always a good idea to ask "who benefits" whenever governments step in to "solve" a crisis.

It is very likely that the shutdown of major developed economies will be followed by a shutdown of emerging markets, creating a supply shock as we have not seen in decades.

Printing up paper money—which is the Fed's solution to nearly everything—will not bring about a miraculous replacement of the lost goods and services or repair broken supply chains.

Finn Kydland and Edward C. Prescott (KP), the 2004 Nobel laureates in economics think that technological shocks can explain 70 percent of economic fluctuations in postwar US data. Unfortunately their quantitative methods are simplistic and ignore the real problem: central banking.

Real wages in Japan have been declining thanks to decades of expansionary monetary and fiscal policies. Now "Japanization" increasingly looks like a fate that awaits Europe.

The coronavirus crisis must cause us to rethink the idea governments can manage these situations. It is absolutely true that most private industry can be trusted, because the alternative for poor or unscrupulous providers is failure.

"Financialization" is the process by which a normal economy is transformed into a fragile economy centered around financial firms. Central banks and government bailouts are to blame.

Eurocrats might be able to get tables in their favoured restaurants more easily while national governments take it on the chin. But this is a temporary situation which could easily evolve into a threat against the union.

As the member states of the EU begin to shut their internal borders to their neighbors, we're reminded that state-to-state open borders in a place like the US do come with a downside.