Economics Questions

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

hashem — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:54:38 GMT

GilesStratton:
Rothbard used Mises' praxeological method and extended it.

Yes.

GilesStratton:
To say Rothbard was a better economist because MES is more advanced in terms of its account of economic phenomena than HA is silly

The point is not who is a better economist. The point is which book is better for learning economics. MES doesn't have the mistakes of Mises, and he adds his Theory of Production. MES was even designed as a textbook. You can learn economics a thousand times better and more clearly from MES. Further, the economics you will be learning won't use any opinion, while even GilesStratton admits that Mises monopoly theory was "unsufficiently subjectivist". Unsufficiently subjectivist is a politically correct term for "not fact."

MES is an extraordinary textbook on economics. As already stated, it takes all the greatest works of his predessecors, fixes them here and there, polishes the rest, and adds the massively important Theory of Production. You don't have to worry about opinion (unsufficiently subjectivist) or any mistakes made by being the pioneer of praxeology. Rothbard loved and reveered Mises. MES is a better textbook on economics.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

hashem — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:44:09 GMT

Erickk:
There is one thing I m worried about which is whether MES does have many political beliefs which might get in way of my understanding of Economics.

No. There are no beliefs in the book. It is an economic book, and everything in it is proved through implications of axioms (mostly, the action axiom). If there are beliefs, it is in the third -- and perhaps most powerful -- volume Power and Market, but these points are still factual implications drawn from economic laws.

Once you start reading it you will see. Rothbard did not ruin his greatest work by injecting opinion into his treatise on economics. If there are beliefs, again, they are in Human Action, as points are sometimes presented without being proved.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Erickk — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:25:42 GMT

GilesStratton:

So no, Rothbard was not half the economist Mises was, and I think of many occasions he let his political beliefs get in the way of his economics (such as his discussion of self ownership), people need to realise MES and HA are treatises on economics and not discussions of ethics, so stop the libertarian bullshit.

There is one thing I m worried about which is whether MES does have many political beliefs which might get in way of my understanding of Economics.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

hayekianxyz — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:16:09 GMT

It's a stupid question asking which is "better", it's similar to asking whether to read Menger's Principles of Economics or Bohm-Bawerk's Capital and Interest, Bohm-Bawerk and Rothbard both had the advantage of coming after Menger and Mises respectively, and have therefore had the priviledge of using their insights and extending them. As such, neither Bohm-Bawerk nor Rothbard was a better economists simply because their works are more advanced and "correct", they both used the method pioneered by their predecessor. Bohm-Bawerk used Menger's exposition of price formation in individual markets to explain "macro" phenomena such as capital and interest, Rothbard used Mises' praxeological method and extended it. Moreover, both the books of Rothbard and Bohm-Bawerk are more specific, whereas the Principles of Economics and Human Action are more general.

To put it in neoclassical terms: the two are complimentary goods, not substitute goods.

To say Rothbard was a better economist because MES is more advanced in terms of its account of economic phenomena than HA is silly, Rothbard had the luxury of using the two strands of Bohm-Bawerks capital theory, the PTP theory of interest of Mises and the structure of production theory of Hayek and Wicksell (that Mises eschewed). Whereas Mises had to develop the entirety of praxeological science by himself, Rothbard used insights of numerous Austrians and integrated them, but did not contribute much of his own analysis, save for his monopoly theory which was only an extension of Misesian thought where it had been unsufficiently subjectivist.

So no, Rothbard was not half the economist Mises was, and I think of many occasions he let his political beliefs get in the way of his economics (such as his discussion of self ownership), people need to realise MES and HA are treatises on economics and not discussions of ethics, so stop the libertarian bullshit.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

hashem — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:43:47 GMT

No problem man. I too am going through MES with it's study guide. I am considering it like a college course, by taking lots of notes and writing a short essay on each chapter as I finish them -- then comparing my essays with the chapter summaries from the study guide.

"Never give up, never surrender!" -- Pineapple Express

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Erickk — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:46:56 GMT

ok, thanks Rothbardian, I m goin for MES

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Erickk — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:36:51 GMT

Ok, thank you a bunch Rothbardian, guess I m goin for MES.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

hashem — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:13:50 GMT

Erickk:
It seems that Human Action is more like a book for the advanced economic readers

Ironically, Human Action is far less advanced than MES. Human Action is only for advanced readers in the sense that it doesn't prove every single possible implication of the action axiom. Sometimes it states implications, and proceeds onward. Rothbard proves every implication from the ground up, and each time shows why the one currently being discussed is in line with previous implications so you are constantly reminded of how you got to where you are right now, rather than be told "this is how it is." MES is far more advanced in the sense that it covers more material (Power and Market, Theory of Production), and it doesn't include flaws previously taken for granted in the Austrian tradition.

Erickk:
but can you show me an example how difficult Human Action is?

It's not difficult at all, I swear. It's not even 1000 pages, whereas MES is 1500. It can be misunderstood as "advanced" in the sense covered above, but it isn't difficult at all.

Erickk:
Also, I do not know what you guys think of Rothbard, but I think he is a little bit too radical

If you read MES from beginning to end, you'll understand his point of view. In fact, as he points out the implications of the action axiom, if you believe the premises, then you will necessarily arrive at the same conclusion. There is nothing taken for granted, everything is proved piece by piece, constantly taking a look back to make sure al the pieces fit together. He doesn't just state what's been previously believed, which is why he differs on a few points from previous Austrian Economists -- indeed, which is why is so radical. Once you understand the whole picture instead of just believing what you are told because it makes more sense than everything else, you will be radical too. This is why Mises was a utilitarian and wrote Human Action -- because it was "the best alternative", whereas Rothbard was a hardcore natural rights anarcho-capitalist and wrote Man, Economy, and State, and Power and Market -- because it conformed to justice, it was the only consistent position.

Erickk:
Ok, so if Human Action is really that hard to understand, I ll go for MES, thanks again

It's not hard to understand, but its not as accurate, as comprehensive, or as consistent as MES, and it doesn't include the important knowledge of Power and Market or the necessary Theory of Production. MES is "a book for the laymen" ONLY because Rothbard is such a genius and incredibly clear writer that laymen can comprehend its immense complexity with ease.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Jon Irenicus — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:06:28 GMT

So... I should read MES first & I will get much more out of reading HA afterwords?

Yeah.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

laminustacitus — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:31:44 GMT

I find Human Action to be a far more interesting read than Man, Economy, and State just because of the fact that Mises covers a plethora of topics in his treatisie, and that appeals to someone like me who finds an interest in just about everything. However, Man, Economy, and State is definately the easier of the two.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Erickk — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:20:16 GMT

A BUNCH OF THANKS GUYS@@@

It seems that Human Action is more like a book for the advanced economic readers, but can you show me an example how difficult Human Action is? Also, I do not know what you guys think of Rothbard, but I think he is a little bit too radical: Unlike Mises and Haykek, he is an anarcho capitalist, even critical of patent. (sorry I don't know what the positions Hayek and Mises hold on patent) I think of Rothbard as a a defender of Liberty and a firm libertarian, and I also agree with you guys on the fact that he is a BRILLIANT writer, presenting Economics in a lucid and informative way, thus making it easy to understand for us laymen, which I appreciate wholeheartedly. But I still doubt whether his too radical position should be taken for granted by us beginners.

Ok, so if Human Action is really that hard to understand, I ll go for MES, thanks again~~

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Conza88 — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:02:04 GMT

Jon Irenicus:

Go for Rothbard. Mises is for more advanced readers IMO, especially as he packs in a lot of apropos statements. His work is lucid but it requires heavy focus and familiarity with the concepts he's discussing. Rothbard, OTOH, assumes no such thing and takes the reader by the hand helping them learn to think for themselves on the topic. Mises expects you to already be able to do this.

So... I should read MES first & I will get much more out of reading HA afterwords?

I've got both study guides as I want to really grasp the modern day applications etc, although I probably won't need it to understand MES. HA would probably help with all those nice fancy words that I get to add to my vocab... lol

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

Jon Irenicus — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:15:20 GMT

Go for Rothbard. Mises is for more advanced readers IMO, especially as he packs in a lot of apropos statements. His work is lucid but it requires heavy focus and familiarity with the concepts he's discussing. Rothbard, OTOH, assumes no such thing and takes the reader by the hand helping them learn to think for themselves on the topic. Mises expects you to already be able to do this.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

DanielMuff — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:38:59 GMT

hashem:

I would add that while Mises was no doubt extraordinary and legendary in his own right, and accomplished more than many even dream of, he was no Rothbard. Rothbard certainly respected Mises immensely, which is apparent from reading either of their works. But Rothbard was a true genius. He was a master of history, philosophy, economics, political theory, and still much of his work is original and systematic. He wrote 25 incredible books thoroughly fleshing out these sort of topics, as well as thousands of articles covering everything under the sun.

Human Action is the utilitarian's guide to Austrian economics.

Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market is a 3 volume, comprehensive compilation of all previous Austrain economics (including Mises) with various flaws polished out, and up to 30% of it involves his completely original Theory of Production.

Also, many people seems to think that Rothbard regurgutated what Mises wrote. However, the reality is that Rothbard disgreed with many thing that Mises wrote. What Rothbard did was take the "Best of" from everywhere then compiled it and added original thought then turned out a masterpiece.

Re: For a layman, is Human Action better than MES?

nirgrahamUK — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:35:45 GMT

you could say this

He was a master of history, philosophy, economics, political theory, and still much of his work is original and systematic.

about Mises.