4 ms·
These conclusions, however, are also consistent with about 70 or more years of economics investigation by members of the austrian school. In fact, is whole eco
by lzw 16y ago
These conclusions, however, are also consistent with about 70 or more years of economics investigation by members of the austrian school. In fact, is whole economic cycle, that ended in 2008 was predicted by austrians in specific in 2001 and in general as far back as the 1920s.
So, this isn't just some single paper with an unexpected conclusion. It is important also because it supports an understanding of economics that is under constant political attack in our society.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago...is whole economic cycle, that ended in 2008 was predicted by austrians in specific in 2001... [Citation needed.]
- sigil 16y agoI'm not sure what 2001 prediction lzw could be referring to, but the Austrian school definitely sounded an early warning on the housing bubble. See this article from 2004 for instance: http://mises.org/daily/1533 http://mises.org/daily/1533 Or, Ron Paul addressing the House in July 2002: http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-26/ron-paul-on-the-housing-bubble-july-2002/ http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-26/ron-paul-on-the-housing-bu...
- Ennis 16y agoI agree that the austrian school has more merit than it's been given but that brand of economists has been spelling doom for many years. It's not out of this world for them to be right at some point. But they are often not right (like on deflation being a good thing.)
- lzw 16y agoSo, you think tibias a bad thing for peoples purchasing power to go up, and for there to consequently be fewer people at or below the poverty line? And for those above the poverty line to have more disposable income to invest in long term or short term needs is also a bad thing? Yet, somehow, the opposite, where everyone is poorer and a lot of preventative maintenance is avoided because it simply can't be afforded, is somehow better?