Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring 1999)

Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring 1999)

Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring 1999)

Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring 1999)

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

The transition from central planning to market-oriented economies in Eastern and Central Europe provides a fascinating laboratory for research in economic theory and business practice. With the collapse of communism, the inefficiencies of centralized planning have been laid bare. The classic debates between Mises and Lange on the viability of planning, although long resolved in the minds of free-market advocates, have been settled.

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

It has long been recognized that the year 1916 was the turning point in World War I, the year in which, as historian René Albrecht-Carrié (1965) put it, the deeper forces broke through.1 This process is not nearly as mysterious as it sounds on first hearing.

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

Volume 2, No. 2 (Summer 1999)

In his article “Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth,” Professor Holcombe (1998) argues that Kirznerian entrepreneurial alertness enables market actors to spot previously unnoticed profit opportunities. Entrepreneurs then act upon these opportunities. As a result, the economy becomes more productive because now more consumer satisfaction can be produced at a lower cost. This is a creative application of the Kirznerian theory, but one that nonetheless suffers from the weaknesses of the theoretical foundation on which it is based.