Forum Post: Two Lectures On The History Of Austrian Economics
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 31, 2011, 7:21 p.m. EST by MonetizingDiscontent
(1257)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Two Lectures On The History Of Austrian Economics
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/two-lectures-history-austrian-economics
by Tyler Durden on -12/31/2011-
When it comes to the types of people in this world, there are those who say that the only way to fix the current economic catastrophe is to keep doing more of the same that got us in this condition in the first place (these are the people who say mean regression is irrelevant, and 10 men and women in an economic room can overturn the laws of math, nature, physics, and everything else and determine what is best for 7 billion people), and then there is everyone else. The former are called Keynesians. The latter are not. Only those in the former camp don't see the lunacy of their fundamental premise, a good example of which is the following. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/30/opinion/keynes-was-right.html?_r=2
Luckily, the world is nearing the tipping point when the camp of the former, which for the simple reason that it allowed the few to steal from the many under the guise that it is for the benefit of all, is about to be overrun, hopefully peacefully and amicable but not necessarily, and the camp of the latter finally has its day in the sun.
Naturally, when that happens the status quo loses, as the entire educational and employment paradigm is one which idolizes the former and ridicules the latter even though the former has now proven beyond a shadow of a doubt it is a miserable failure (ref: $20+ trillion excess debt overhang which will, without doubt, lead to a global debt repudiation or restructuring, with some components of "odious debt"). http://www.zerohedge.com/news/muddle-through-has-failed-bcg-says-there-may-be-only-painful-ways-out-crisis
So for all those still confused what some of the core premises of the ascendent "latter" are, below we present two one-hour lectures by Israel Kirzner. We urge readers to set aside two hours, which otherwise would be devoted to watching rubbish on TV or waiting in line for In N Out burger, and watch the two lectures below. Because, contrary to what the voodoo shamans of failure will tell you, there is a way out. It is a very painful way, but it does exist. The alternative is an assured and complete systemic collapse once the can kicking finally fails.
The History of Austrian Economics, Part 1 - Dr. Israel Kirzner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uhdNmHONY-E
The History of Austrian Economics, Part 2 - Dr. Israel Kirzner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS49-RmZAxk&feature=player_embedded
Capitalism is dead for too many reasons. I'd say it's abut 50 years past it's historical shelf-life and starting to stink. The resurgence of Austrian economics popularity is the bargaining phase of the grief cycle of the end of capitalism.
No, but thank you very much. We don't need Austrian economics.
Agreed.
=) well then everything should turn out just fine then. Ben's got it under control, Greenspan taught him everything he knows.
Don't be a punk. That's not what GirlFriday is saying.
Im not punking anyone. We'll either print more money backed by nothing tangible, save for the promise to pay, (for the public to pay) through inflation (which is a tax and which requires no discipline at all to do when unconcerned with saving anything) ...Or we wont ..but watch, if they keep printing, there will be a 40% devaluation in the dollar, and it will happen as suddenly as our credit downgrades did. Overnight, because there was nothing to back the promise to pay up with
(Its always us paying. They always make someone else pay for debt they sign Us onto, and Its the banks debt, by the way. 90% of it isn't even ours)
...Its tougher to put merit into ones word/promise, (to pay) isn't it. It requires the discipline to follow through, and give your word value, doesn't it. But we just keep hiking the debt ceiling up and up, and with interest rates so low, it doesn't pay to loan anymore to the public, who are bailing them out.
But yet the cycle is continued - print.. at interest.. and loan it into being. debt money.... wash, rinse, repeat... wash rinse repeat...
Its debt. Not money. Its a promissory note. A promise to pay ...next time.
On the other hand, I don't believe what we are seeing is true keynesian economics either though. Because even then, saving is required, in good times, of course. but again, they dont.
Over all, I see Keynesian economics as the go-to theory for those who like government at the controls of the economy, because an elastic 'pragmatic' money system makes it possible to fund war and unfunded trillion dollar mandates. Aren't credit cards great? When you can pass the bill onto someone else? With rules like that who needs to cheat.
Something physical must back up money issuance unit for unit, or in essence it is only debt. Multiplied by interest. Multiplied by hypothication and rehypothication up to a 140 times. Thats not just loose money policy, it is harmful.
Its off topic but, ya know we could issue money debt free, without interest just by cutting out the middle man and placing the power of creaing money back into a body that is ELECTED by the people, an so held accountable to the voting public, unlike the current system where the policy makers and implementers are -appointed- and accountable to no one.
And also, i mean this, my comment to GirlfFriday was not meant to punk her out... c'mon. I sincerely apologize though, just the same, if she actually felt that way. I meant nothing personal and bared no malice in anyway. Business as usual then, was the only message i intended to deliver.
And if anyone wants to look at real life monetary policy as it is being practiced (interventions) today:
Remarks by Governor Ben S. Bernanke Before the National Economists Club, Washington, D.C.
Deflation: Making Sure "It" Doesn't Happen Here
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/20021121/default.htm -November 21, 2002-
In this 2002 speech by --then-- Federal Reserve Board Governor Ben Bernanke is saying that If he ever faced another Great Depression, he would do 5 things... and he has done everything he said he would do so far, now that he is at the helm, as Chairman! Accept for one final thing....
And the only thing left that Ben promised to do, that he hasn't done yet...
Ben Bernanke 2002: "Although a policy of intervening to affect the exchange value of the dollar is nowhere on the horizon today, it's worth noting that there have been times when exchange rate policy has been an effective weapon against deflation. A striking example from U.S. history is Franklin Roosevelt's 40 percent devaluation of the dollar against gold in 1933-34, enforced by a program of gold purchases and domestic money creation. The devaluation and the rapid increase in money supply it permitted ended the U.S. deflation remarkably quickly. Indeed, consumer price inflation in the United States, year on year, went from -10.3 percent in 1932 to -5.1 percent in 1933 to 3.4 percent in 1934.17 The economy grew strongly, and by the way, 1934 was one of the best years of the century for the stock market. If nothing else, the episode illustrates that monetary actions can have powerful effects on the economy, even when the nominal interest rate is at or near zero, as was the case at the time of Roosevelt's devaluation."
Folks should really take some time to read this whole speech. The plan was set long ago when before Ben was made Chairman. This speech had everything to do with why he was appointed. And again its not the man that is the problem. Its the policy. Its not personal. Not even when it comes to Ben.
A typical libertarian fallacy that confuses a symptom of broader and more foundational forces for a root cause. FDR's revocation of the domestic gold standard and Nixon's revocation of the international gold standard in the debt-dollar reserve system were natural outcomes in the evolution of the industrial capitalist system.
It was the system of private property, private markets, never-ending growth and profits that made gold unsuitable as a monetary backing for the elite class. It was not just the individual greed of politicians and bankers who wanted to control the money supply and expand the power of the state. Again, those are merely symptoms. And all of this ignores the broader and more severe energy/envrionmental issues we face due to a combination of our socioeconomic/political/cultural environment and human behavior, which includes aspects of both greed and malice.
A gold standard has never, and could never adequately resolve those issues in a complex, global society such as the one that was emerging at the turn of the 20th century.
The industrial/financial capitalist system requires increasing growth in economic activity and therefore the money supply over time. An adequately policed and enforced gold standard does not allow that. If you really want a return to what you would call "free market capitalism" at anything resembling the scale of economic activity that we have today, then you should not be advocating for a gold standard, because it would surely be the final nail in its coffin.
Here we go again. Pushing 1%er economics. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P_Yq1AIDjM
Regardless of the weight of anyones wallet, or whether one understand the disciplines involved in its theory, 1 + 1 still = 2
neat voice in your video link, though.
Not my video. I would suggest some further reading of Paul Krugman NY Times column.
Paul Krugman? Over there at the New York Times? yeah.. I am aware of him. He's very slippery about how he puts his position, but he is allowing readers to draw the conclusion that a war would be good for the economy.
He has never said so, but the way he frames his policy descriptions in the various places that he writes, both at the NWT and his own blog, the inference is inescapable, that he is effectively saying, although not explicitly saying, that a war would be good for the American economy.
Now, i personally find this despicable. And the data he uses, of debt levels during WW II is just untrue, but.. thats another story for another day.
I listened to that video. And I've already done homework on Paul-war-is-a-benefit-for-our-economy Krugman. I used to read him all the time. His labor day article is was the final straw for me.
Paul Volker raised interest rates in 1980 in order to halt inflation. And notice - he raised them on an average of 464 basis points Over the inflation rate, and it still took him three years to bring inflation to heel. Once you allow inflation to get started ( which is what Mr. Bernanke and also Krugman are arguing for - "controlled moderate inflation") its very difficult to stop. Once its out of the bag it is Very Tough to get it back Into That Bag... what was that I heard about another Trillion dollar hike in the debt ceiling the other day? lol
Read again if you think he wants war.
excellent, austrian economics and pure capitalism is the way forward