Message -
From: Peter Boettke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: Austrians and markets
Mark,
I am surprised you would be making this argument ... do you believe that
the
market for legislation is efficient because it exists
The institutions of property, prices and profit and loss are at best
approximated in science --- we have at best attenuated property rights,
etc. The coin of the realm in science is pretige and reputation. It
is not necessarily a cash nexus, though of course some drug research
etc. does
Actually, I am not making (or trying to make) an argument, I am simply
interested in responses from this list given the range of ideologies. I
agree wholly with previous statements made on this list that Austrian
economics has made large contributions to economics. My question deals more
with
Hello? If the history of the twentieth century is not an undeniable
argument against the hypothesis that the market for social science is
not efficient then what is?
Alex
--
Dr. Alexander Tabarrok
Vice President and Director of Research
The Independent Institute
100 Swan Way
Oakland, CA,
What do you mean by the history of the 20th century being an argument for
efficiency?
Keynesianism --- 1930-1980 --- pretty good run.
Market socialism --- 1936-1985 --- pretty good run.
Market failure theory, with a benevolent despot --- 1920s -- 1960s ---
pretty good run.
I am confused. Do
Yes, I was refering to the Boulding article you mention -- perhaps we read
it differently.
Second, I think there are several reasons why Austrians have
difficulities --- some self-induced, others as a consequence of other
issues. Public choice scholars should realize that for a long period of
Don't you think there is a difference between efficiency in the
intellectual arena and truth? I think that intellectual
institutions are fairly good at allocating resources to
efficiently produce normal science - ie, science that
refines and explores a given view of the world.
Truth may require
Sorry, double negatives confuse me. I mean of course that the history of
the twentieth century (Marxist-Leinism, communism, fascism etc.) is an
argument against the efficiency of the market in social science.
alex
Alex Tabarrok wrote:
Hello? If the history of the twentieth century is not an
From: Mark Steckbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Austrians and markets
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:32:32 -0500
A colleague who had run and managed businesses in a previous life recently
asked me to name a management strategy based on Austrian
I'll rephrase what Sherwin Rosen said in some speeches and
articles before his death. He argued that Austrian economics
includes a number of ideas, which have varying degrees of
acceptance in the market place of ideas. The subjective theory
of value is accepted by most economists as are other
--- Mark Steckbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the recent post by Dan Klein
pertaining to changing the name of the school (let's put the old wine in new
wineskins)
Mark Steckbeck
I think your interpretation of Dan Klein's proposal is not what he intended.
As I understand it, the proposal is
11 matches
Mail list logo
