3 ms·

Yes, reading the texts from a school of economics that was capable of predicting the price inflation we see now from the money supply inflation of the previous

by caeril 3y ago

Yes, reading the texts from a school of economics that was capable of predicting the price inflation we see now from the money supply inflation of the previous decade seems like a horrible idea. Better to read about economics from the Keynesians and Chicago Monetarists who completely fucking failed to see the inflation coming, were "surprised" by it, and are now OVER-tightening their way to a depression. The same schools that only saw a "little froth" in the 2007 housing market, the same schools that STILL have no model to figure out why RRP participation is stubbornly stuck north of $2T, the same schools whose own dot plots are consistently WILDLY inaccurate even 6 months out. Good advice.

notahacker 3y ago
Aside from the fact that my core point was about the fact that the present system didn't even exist in 1963 for Rothbard to get angry about it, the Mises Austrians' habit of making annual predictions of imminent hyperinflation - something which has still never happened in the US - is hardly a track record that compares favourably with more mainstream economists! Oh, and the current level of price rises? Had it on numerous occasions in the 19th century under the deregulated banking system notionally pegged to gold that Mises and Rothbard fetishised, followed by even more destructive deflation cycles. Plus higher interest rates than the "overtightening"
- caeril 3y ago
  Fair points. Maybe the entirety of economics should rightly be considered the voodoo psuedoscience that it is.
  - G3rn0ti 3y ago
    Guys, I recommended the book because I believe it gives a rather good introduction to the fundamentals of money and banking, even though its title is designed to catch your attention. I am _not_ claiming it's the ultimate source of truth, of course, and sure enough, there is this whole "classical economists" (aka "Austrian" school) vs "Chicago school" (aka "monetarists") going on behind the scenes suggesting other books as well... Regarding this whole battle I'd say the monetarists should be able to sleep well, since they dominate all economics anyway these days. Neoclassical economics is all about empirical research, quantitative predictions and tests. Insofar it is, of course, a real science and they certainly can do good research. However, economic policies are rarely evaluated empirically and are usually not justified by real research. And let's face it: the FED's policies are ultimately done do serve the government only (even if it is formally "independent"), since it is a government drowning in debts that profits the most from cheap money unlike its citizens. Austrians do "economic research" by logical reasoning alone in the tradition of the humanities. They might not publish econometric models but they are able to explain and reason about fundamental economic facts with great clarity unlike most modern economists. This becomes especially obvious when it comes to monetary policies. Hence, in any economic crisis I recommend reading "Austrian" books because they are able to teach a valuable lesson.

by caeril 3y ago

notahacker 3y ago

Aside from the fact that my core point was about the fact that the present system didn't even exist in 1963 for Rothbard to get angry about it, the Mises Austrians' habit of making annual predictions of imminent hyperinflation - something which has still never happened in the US - is hardly a track record that compares favourably with more mainstream economists! Oh, and the current level of price rises? Had it on numerous occasions in the 19th century under the deregulated banking system notionally pegged to gold that Mises and Rothbard fetishised, followed by even more destructive deflation cycles. Plus higher interest rates than the "overtightening"

caeril 3y ago
Fair points. Maybe the entirety of economics should rightly be considered the voodoo psuedoscience that it is.
- G3rn0ti 3y ago
  Guys, I recommended the book because I believe it gives a rather good introduction to the fundamentals of money and banking, even though its title is designed to catch your attention. I am _not_ claiming it's the ultimate source of truth, of course, and sure enough, there is this whole "classical economists" (aka "Austrian" school) vs "Chicago school" (aka "monetarists") going on behind the scenes suggesting other books as well... Regarding this whole battle I'd say the monetarists should be able to sleep well, since they dominate all economics anyway these days. Neoclassical economics is all about empirical research, quantitative predictions and tests. Insofar it is, of course, a real science and they certainly can do good research. However, economic policies are rarely evaluated empirically and are usually not justified by real research. And let's face it: the FED's policies are ultimately done do serve the government only (even if it is formally "independent"), since it is a government drowning in debts that profits the most from cheap money unlike its citizens. Austrians do "economic research" by logical reasoning alone in the tradition of the humanities. They might not publish econometric models but they are able to explain and reason about fundamental economic facts with great clarity unlike most modern economists. This becomes especially obvious when it comes to monetary policies. Hence, in any economic crisis I recommend reading "Austrian" books because they are able to teach a valuable lesson.