Current Events

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

I. Ryan — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 22:47:44 GMT

Sukrit:

Is Kirzner still alive? If so, why don't we hear from him? Does he still write?

Here is a lecture by him from just last year.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:01:03 GMT

Kirzner is still alive, but I'm not sure if he still writes (he is 80 years old). I think Kirzner would be an excellent choice for a Nobel prize in economics, given the work he has done in reviving the topic of entrepreneurship. I just don't think he has been "influential" enough (according to mainstream standards, that is) — not enough citations in mainstream publications.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Sukrit — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:35:17 GMT

Is Kirzner still alive? If so, why don't we hear from him? Does he still write?

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

hayekianxyz — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:05:31 GMT

Kakugo:

Nobel Prizes have been more about politics than anything else. Einstein got his Nobel Prize in 1921 for his work on the photoelectric effect. Rewarding him for his work on relativity would have meant rewarding Langevin too and Langevin was too much of a political "hot potato" to handle (he was a staunch Communist).

I don't really see this fitting the facts, I mean in 2008 Krugman wins the award and the next year Ostrom wins the award, in terms of political views there's a considerable distance between them, especially in comparison to the rest of the profession. List of winners includes people like Buchanan, Coase, Hayek, Becker, Stigler and Friedman all of whom are free markets guys. Perhaps more people who would be considered liberals win, but then, most economists are liberals.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Caley McKibbin — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:55:08 GMT

Student's idea is brilliant. Tax people for $1m and award it to someone that agree with us. Why didn't I think of that?

The Bank of Sweden prize is so slimy that even Peter Nobel speaks out against it.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

ziragt — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:43:21 GMT

thelion:
Mark Blaug? He is against Mises' work in all his histories. Why mention Mark Blaug, of all people?

I mentioned him because I enjoy his work and find it challenging. It would also be nice if those who do work in history of thought or methodology got a little respect, for once. Notice, I did not say he was a fellow traveler. (By the way, his recent articles in History of Political Economy have been brilliant; check out his piece on the three theorems of welfare economics)

As for Huerta de Soto, I have not read his "Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles" in its entirety, but judging from his "Theory of Dynamic Efficiency," he does not seem to have done a great deal of original, pioneering work. His work is of a high academic standard, but it mainly retreads the same ground that Austrians have been writing on for years.

If I were to nominate an Austrian, I would probably pick someone working on the theory of organizations and firms, since it is there that real progress has been made by Austrians. For example, Nicolai Foss or Peter Lewin, two under appreciated Austrians.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Daniel James Sanchez — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 05:19:24 GMT

hayekianxyz:
Yes, I view the full reserve position as a bit nutty (and Lilburne, I don't believe that implies he is a nut or is in the least bit disrespectful)

You didn't say the position was a bit nutty, you said:

hayekianxyz:
anybody who disputes the necessity of FRB is nuts

JH de Soto disputes the necessity of FRB. Ergo...

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

DanielMuff — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:12:33 GMT

hayekianxyz:

... But the question posed in the OP concerned whether or not Jesus Huerta de Soto deserved the Nobel prize, and I don't think he deserves it much more than he deserves an Olypmic gold medal for the 100 meters...

I didn't pose any question in the OP.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

hayekianxyz — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 02:48:27 GMT

To most of those who posted after me, the Nobel prize has always been awarded to people based on a number of criteria that Jesus Huerta de Soto does not fit, no matter how intelligent he may or may not be. It's one thing to argue that he is a good, or even great economist, but this doesn't necessitate winning the prize. There are plenty of economists, including those named by ziragt and myself, who fit the criteria for the Nobel prize to a greater extent than does Huerta de Soto, all of whom do great work. If you disagree with the selection criteria of the committee, that's one thing and from some point of views that may be understandable, but the award isn't simply given to economists who are good or who you like but meet certain other requirements.

Now, if you want to debate whether or not the requirements are fair, efficient or whatever then we can start another topic and debate that, I think they are pretty fair and reasonable. But the question posed in the OP concerned whether or not Jesus Huerta de Soto deserved the Nobel prize, and I don't think he deserves it much more than he deserves an Olypmic gold medal for the 100 meters.

Concerning FRB, I don't want to get into this. Yes, I view the full reserve position as a bit nutty (and Lilburne, I don't believe that implies he is a nut or is in the least bit disrespectful). But the point I was trying to make is that full reserve banking isn't something that is often challenged by mainstream economists and anybody who pushes for that policy proposal as hard as Huerta de Soto does probably doesn't deserve the Nobel prize.

EDIT: Regarding Selgin, perhaps you agree with Huerta de Soto more but the fact remains that Selgin has done work within the mainstream developing free banking theory. It's probably too soon (same applies for Huerta de Soto, by the way) but he has worked on developing and elaborating upon a new research programme.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Kakugo — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:14:48 GMT

Nobel Prizes have been more about politics than anything else. Einstein got his Nobel Prize in 1921 for his work on the photoelectric effect. Rewarding him for his work on relativity would have meant rewarding Langevin too and Langevin was too much of a political "hot potato" to handle (he was a staunch Communist).

My bet is we'll probably see a slow shift towards laissez-faire and free market recipients as interventionist politics around the world fail to address problems and government will be forced to turn to the hated "free marketers" for a way out. This won't be quick and won't be easy but is bound to happen.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

thelion — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:51:57 GMT

ziragt:

It's a shame that no one here has mentioned either Leland Yeager or Axel Leijonhufvud., two slightly more plausible fellow travelers. Another economist that deserves mention is Mark Blaug. Every article he writes is full of novel analysis.

Mark Blaug? He is against Mises' work in all his histories. Why mention Mark Blaug, of all people? [See p. 81 of "Blaug's The Methodology of Economics"].

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

hkarnoldson — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:22:53 GMT

hayekianxyz:

Rothbardians don't seem to comprehend how people don't see the fraudulent and destructive nature of FRB, conversely, mainstream economists think that anybody who disputes the necessity of FRB is nuts (which I agree with, btw).

I didn't understand Rothbard's case against FRB first either. I think it is just the definitions that are vague though. "Why can't we pool our reserve funds in a bank? It is like a car-pool, they aren't fraudulent." This was problematic until I realized it has nothing what so ever to do with FRB. Once you make it clear that FRB can exist only for demand deposits and that a demand deposit is an unrestricted promise to deliver money on demand it becomes much more obvious where the problem is...

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

ziragt — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:04:44 GMT

It's a shame that no one here has mentioned either Leland Yeager or Axel Leijonhufvud., two slightly more plausible fellow travelers. Another economist that deserves mention is Mark Blaug. Every article he writes is full of novel analysis.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

DD5 — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:59:38 GMT

Grayson Lilburne:

DD5:
You haven't read the thing.

I'm pretty sure he has, actually.

If you know him, I can't argue with that.

In my opinion, his entire post is driven by this:

hayekianxyz:

Rothbardians don't seem to comprehend how people don't see the fraudulent and destructive nature of FRB, conversely, mainstream economists think that anybody who disputes the necessity of FRB is nuts (which I agree with, btw).

The rest was just a buildup so he can add that last remark.

Re: Jesus Huerta de Soto for Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:30:52 GMT

DD5:

But why are we treating this prize as if it actually signified some meaningful achievement. Yes, every now and then, some worthy person gets the award. You could have a better record if they just picked names out of a hat. The award is nothing but a sham, no more then the Nobel peace prize.

He mentioned Krtzner just so his list sounds more credible.

The only thing that doesn't make the prize meaningful is how the economists are chosen. We are implicitly assuming in this thread that Austrians would have a chance, meaning some type of change in the thought process of those in charge of voting. Obviously, I don't think anybody really thinks that de Soto has a chance.