5 ms·

OP didn't claim Friedman was an Austrian, merely a monetarist.

• conistonwater 9y ago
  He wasn't "building on" Austrian school either. I think you're being pedantic, that sentence seems relatively clear to me.
  • wavefunction 9y ago
    How am I being pedantic? You mentioned that Friedman was not considered part of the "Austrian school" which is true but I pointed out that wasn't what was claimed. I'm not arguing the nature of the facts, just pointing out the fact. Hopefully you can relax a bit, this is just a dialog and not a debate where I'm trying to score points against your claims.
  • dalbasal 9y ago
    I meant Friedman as an example of monetarism, if that's the confusion. I consider him closely related to Austrian economics, neoliberal economics... at least when it comes to business cycles. A lot of "keynsians" are much more removed from keynes himslef than Friedman is from Hayek, Mises, Bastiat.. Obviously every individual is different and taxonomies are fuzzy. I'm not attached to my taxonomy, just trying to comment without lots of footnotes.
    • conistonwater 9y ago
      Friedman was pretty clearly opposed to Austrian views, so I don't really see where you're coming from.