The present glut in the money markets, with excessively cheap money and its attendant evils and dangers to the credit structure of the country, is due to the concurrence of three main causes: 

1. The unprecedented flow of gold to the United States.
2. The current business reaction.
3. Excessive Federal Reserve Bank earning assets, due to a feeling on the part of the Federal Reserve authorities that they owe it to their stockholders to earn expenses and dividends at all times.

The text of a speech given by University of California at Los Angeles professor of economics Benjamin M. Anderson on May 11, 1943, which deals with the subject of foreign exchange stabilization.

Delivered before the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York, New York City, February 3, 1944.

While there are many economists and philosophers who have defended the right to become wealthy, few have defended wealth per se. But in fact, the simple existence of wealth is economically of great importance, quite apart from the familiar need for society to accumulate capital for investment. Wealth and the inequality it breeds are actually central to the functioning of our entire economic system.

This paper was prepared for consideration for a Ludwig von Mises prize to be awarded at the Mises Institute’s 10th anniversary conference, October 9-11,1992. The paper draws from and expands upon a manuscript entitled “The Evolution of Values and Institutions in a Free Society: The Underpinnings of a Market Economy,” prepared for the International Conference on the Unity of Sciences, held in Seoul, Korea in August of 1992.

      You may have noticed that I put a question mark after the title of this paper. I must explain why.

May I start by summarizing professor Hart’s essay in a few words.1

Volume 4, No. 2 (Summer 2001)

In my critique of Austrian economics, I carved out a virtually unique position: Despite the Austrians’ professed devotion to “realism” against neoclassical pragmatism, the latter approach is in fact far more realistic than the former. Hülsmann and Block remain unconvinced. The editor’s invitation to respond provides me with an ideal opportunity not only to defend myself, but to spell out the philosophical side of my original thesis in greater depth.

Dominick T. Armentano Antitrust Reform: Predatory Practices and the Competitive Process Acrobat Distiller 7.0.5 (Windows)

There are major and fundamental disagreements between some of the leading Austrians, and these disagreements are created by wholly different theories concerning the definition of monopoly, the origins of monopoly, and the supposed effects of monopoly on consumer sovereignty and efficient resource allocation.