|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fried Egg
Breakfast Cannibal
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:41 pm Post subject: 81 |
 |
|
| It should also be interesting to hear why you believe the great depression was an example of bank runs and recessions being allowed to run their course...when it was quite the opposite. The "New Deal" programmed sought to protect industry (both sound investments and malinvestments alike) from collapse. The effect of which dragged out the depression for years. It is only when the malinvestments have been liquidated that society's scant resources can be re-allocated to serve the market's most urgents ends. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dr. Borodog
Mad Scientist
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 5:03 pm Post subject: 82 |
|
|
| Quote: |
| As for the axioms of the Austrian school, either Stirrer rejects them or accepts them. If he rejects them, what point is there in continuing this discussion? |
Paul pointed something out to me last night, and I'm going to steal his thunder briefly. He said that even if you don't take Human Action to be axiomatic, but rather just as a really, really, really, really good empirical rule, you still arive at the Law of Diminishing Marginal Returns, and all of Austrian Economics falls into place, pristine, and untouched. The Austrians still win. 
------------------
You will respect my philosophai. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Samadhi
+1
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:01 pm Post subject: 83 |
|
|
IN RE: The New Deal prolonging the depression, I'm having trouble finding sites with detailed analysis. They all seem to reference Thomas Sowell and Jim Powell's new book.
Does anyone have some good references I could check out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Borodog
Mad Scientist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Borodog
Mad Scientist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Borodog
Mad Scientist
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Borodog
Mad Scientist
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:19 pm Post subject: 87 |
|
|
This reminds me of a conversation I had once. We were discussing the implications of time travel, hunting for some story ideas, and my friend asked me, "If you could go back in time and kill one historical figure, who would it be?"
Hitler, you ask? Stalin perhaps?
Nope. Without a doubt, I said I would go back in time and kill FDR.
I think now my position has changed, and I'd have to pick Alexander Hamilton.
------------------
You will respect my philosophai. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Samadhi
+1
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 7:01 pm Post subject: 88 |
|
|
Thanks. Had a friend over Saturday night who's starting law school in the fall. I'm trying to shake him free of some of his pro-government ideas.
"You should pay taxes because you owe it to the society that allowed you to make that much money."
"You drive me crazy! You're as poor as me and you always side with those rich bastards, you're such a Republican." (Had to go off on him there, that's for sure. Call me an asshat if you want, but don't call me a republican.)
"Government spending is needed sometimes to spur the economy."
"Top 10%? Oh, got to be 200-300K a year"
Sigh. A lot of work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pablo
Never Draws a Blank
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 7:37 pm Post subject: 89 |
|
|
Samadhi,
In case I haven't mentioned it, I admire you more than anyone else here.
Most people who are in your (going by what you say) income bracket only see themselves as victims of the corporations and rich people. For you to see past your immediate situation as you do demonstrates a lot of wisdom and character. People like you give me hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Samadhi
+1
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 7:49 pm Post subject: 90 |
|
|
| Aww shucks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aarondalf
the original GL stud
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2004 8:05 pm Post subject: 91 |
|
|
Do I count? I mean, I may be poor now but with a few years of tennis I'd be a rich bastard.
(By the way, tennis is going well and I'll be playing in Europe in a couple of months ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fuldu
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:09 pm Post subject: 92 |
|
|
I can't believe I'm going to get into the middle of this, but...
Originally posted by Dr. Borodog:
Austrian economics begins with the Human Action axiom —- meaning that people choose between ends purposefully. If you attempt to refute the Human Action axiom, you contradict yourself because you purposefully try to show that you don’t act purposefully.
This is not strictly a logical argument. In order for this to be an airtight logical argument, the Human Action axiom must state that people always choose between ends purposefully. Otherwise it's just the Cretan paradox. Epimenides the Cretan can consistently state that all Cretans are liars, because being a liar doesn't necessarily mean that you lie all the time. Similarly, I can purposefully attempt to refute the Human Action axiom because, although I will admit that people sometimes act purposefully, I don't believe that they always act purposefully. The refutation is an example of acting purposefully; humming Neil Diamond in the shower is not, in my view.
| Quote: |
| Even if you have the same person and repeatedly ask him what he would like for lunch, you’ll get different answers. Nothing in the social sciences is repeatable. Thus, the scientific method that works so well in the Natural Sciences cannot work in the social sciences. |
And this is a straw man argument. True ceteris paribus conditions are equally impossible to obtain in the natural sciences. The flask contains a very slightly different ratio of nitrogen to oxygen in the air, solar flare activity is stronger, and the universe has expanded to a larger size. Any reasonable researcher will note those changes in the conditions that seem pertinent and try to produce the best approximation they can.
In the social sciences, another means of promoting the value of a result is through external validity. By reproducing the result in as many different conditions as possible, researchers try to show that the question of what uncontrollable circumstances exist isn't relevant to the outcome. This is by no means a perfect system, but, again, it is merely an extension of similar choices within the natural sciences.
| Quote: |
| From the Human Action axiom, we can deduce that people have preference scales in which they rank their ends. |
From the updated Human Action axiom presented above, yes, you could likely deduce this, although there is still the question of how purposeful individuals deal with instances of complete indifference.
However, I would disagree with the claims of the Human Action axiom, precisely because I don't think we invariably see people exhibit the behavior described in this last quote. If a theory predicts outcomes contrary to exhibited behavior or facts, it suggests that the theory isn't a perfect descriptor of the world. Many experiments have been conducted (and replicated over many sets of conditions) in which, in a grossly oversimplified example, people prefer being given $1000 to being given $2000 and then having $750 taken away, even though they would prefer being given $1250 even more. This is only one piece of the larger study of prospect theory, for which Daniel Kahneman won part of last year's Nobel Prize in Economics. Those interested in some other examples and details of the work might go to www.nobel.se/economics/laureates/2002/ecoadv02.pdf .
This is not to say that the Austrian School is wrong, only that the presented arguments don't support it the way the author supposes. For example, the arguments about moral hazard are accurate, although they presume that the money involved at the present time is the only pertinent consideration. This is a credible view, but if one feels it is important to consider reputation and the potential value of future investments, one can come to a different conclusion just as credibly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
