Economics Questions

Re: Hayek

scineram — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:35:39 GMT

Especially if you are intereseted in scoring political points rather than correctness.

Re: Hayek

CrazyCoot — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:27:41 GMT

"Even Hayek believed X" or "Even Milton Friedman believed X" do a good deal of damage and provide ammo for the opposing side.

Re: Hayek

abskebabs — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:01:08 GMT

Daniel Muffinburg:

What is "UCLA Berkeley"?

My mistake....

I should have put UCLA, for some reason thought they were the same thing...(cries and hangs head in shame)

Re: Hayek

liberty student — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:40:50 GMT

laminustacitus:
The quote was speaking about Mises, not Hayek.

Was Mises a "both of them"?

Re: Hayek

laminustacitus — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 18:23:49 GMT

liberty student:

BlackNumero:

He then had to go New York speaking no english, which certainly had a negative effect on his influence (Both of them were jewish). Could be wrong though.

I don't believe Hayek was Jewish. I could be wrong.

The quote was speaking about Mises, not Hayek.

Re: Hayek

DanielMuff — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:18:43 GMT

abskebabs:

It might be worth noting as well that Mises was in fact offered a post several times in the late 1930s at UCLA Berkeley, which he ultimately paid the price in dithering over. Arguably, his long term intellectual impact could have been much smaller as a result, it is perhaps uncertain if he would ever write Human Action or met Rothbard. The course of history could have been very different.

What is "UCLA Berkeley"?

Re: Hayek

liberty student — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:24:57 GMT

BlackNumero:

He then had to go New York speaking no english, which certainly had a negative effect on his influence (Both of them were jewish). Could be wrong though.

I don't believe Hayek was Jewish. I could be wrong.

Re: Hayek

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:22:14 GMT

abskebabs:

It might be worth noting as well that Mises was in fact offered a post several times in the late 1930s at UCLA Berkeley, which he ultimately paid the price in dithering over. Arguably, his long term intellectual impact could have been much smaller as a result, it is perhaps uncertain if he would ever write Human Action or met Rothbard. The course of history could have been very different.

Yea, but then maybe we wouldn't have to deal with Bradford deLong.

EDIT: Oh, nvm. I confused UCLA Berkeley (UC Berkely) with UCLA (UC Los Angeles).

Re: Hayek

abskebabs — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:33:02 GMT

It might be worth noting as well that Mises was in fact offered a post several times in the late 1930s at UCLA Berkeley, which he ultimately paid the price in dithering over. Arguably, his long term intellectual impact could have been much smaller as a result, it is perhaps uncertain if he would ever write Human Action or met Rothbard. The course of history could have been very different.

Re: Hayek

Esuric — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:16:24 GMT

I consider myself a Hayekian and I'm proud of it!

Re: Hayek

Daniel James Sanchez — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:15:48 GMT

BlackNumero:

I always thought one of the reasons was that Hayek went to England at the end of the 20s before the Nazis took over while Mises stayed around for a bit longer, where he then went to Switzerland and fled that to go to New York fearing a Nazi takeover. He then had to go New York speaking no english, which certainly had a negative effect on his influence (Both of them were jewish). Could be wrong though.

That might have played into it. But Lionel Robbins had big plans for Hayek at LSE, and it was a big opportunity in and of itself.

Re: Hayek

BlackNumero — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:13:36 GMT

I always thought one of the reasons was that Hayek went to England at the end of the 20s before the Nazis took over while Mises stayed around for a bit longer, where he then went to Switzerland and fled that to go to New York fearing a Nazi takeover. He then had to go New York speaking no english, which certainly had a negative effect on his influence (Both of them were jewish). Could be wrong though.

Re: Hayek

Andrew Cain — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:42 GMT

J. Grayson Lilburne:

Laughing Man:

laminustacitus:
I for one believe that Hayek is the soundest proponents of Liberalism that the Austrian school has to offer, and he was in the position to best make the case for it that will be remembered.

Well that is your opinion. I am of the opinion that it was Rothbard and I'm sure someone else here is of the opinion that it was Mises.

Yeah, that would be me.

Yea I made that sentence with you in mind. I'm not saying Hayek is a bad or stupid economist. I would be a moron to say such a thing. I just think he was acknowledged because of the style of his presentation and perhaps not the full realization of some of his ideas. It is like Mises and his reluctance to anarchism. I'm not going to say that 'Man Mises is horrible because he didn't advocate anarchism.' I like the radicalism of Rothbard. Perhaps I need to be tempered a bit from time to time.

Re: Hayek

Daniel James Sanchez — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:09:21 GMT

Laughing Man:

laminustacitus:
I for one believe that Hayek is the soundest proponents of Liberalism that the Austrian school has to offer, and he was in the position to best make the case for it that will be remembered.

Well that is your opinion. I am of the opinion that it was Rothbard and I'm sure someone else here is of the opinion that it was Mises.

Yeah, that would be me.

Re: Hayek

DanielMuff — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:05:32 GMT

J. Grayson Lilburne:

Okay, I recognize that my interpretation did not fit exactly LM's meaning. But even with the IPE class context, the remark was still disparaging and unfair regarding Hayek. To say that the class "only acknowledged Hayek for his compromises" directly implies that his actual merits were not a factor, or were a minor one in comparison to his compromises.

Well, I'm not going to speculate as to what else LM implied. I'll let you and LM work it out.