Economics Questions

Re: Jaitly: MIses not an Austrian, Böhm-Bawerk is

John James — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 10:21:26 GMT

What's really crazy is the fact that this whole saga is over 6 months old....

Tom Woods destroys Max Keiser

Re: Jaitly: MIses not an Austrian, Böhm-Bawerk is

Hairnet — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 06:58:10 GMT

This video is old, and I have to ask, is RT for real?

What is the point of this network?

Why was this guy even brought on to talk about authors like this in such an unintelligent way? The whole discussion seemed to be really random and scattered.

Why was Ayn Rand even brought up? Does this guy hate her or something. I am not suprised or anything, but even the guest speaker seemed a little supprised when he started talking about fake libertarian in a discussion about Mises.

Ayn Rand did not support the idea that things were valuable in of themselves. I mean really, George Reisman.

Re: Jaitly: MIses not an Austrian, Böhm-Bawerk is

Neodoxy — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 00:54:43 GMT

"Well, for starters he was a jew."

/thread

Re: Jaitly: MIses not an Austrian, Böhm-Bawerk is

ToxicAssets — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 22:58:10 GMT

Well, for starters he was a jew.

Jaitly: MIses not an Austrian, Böhm-Bawerk is

vive la insurrection — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 22:34:49 GMT

This is kind of crazy:

http://beforeitsnews.com/gold-and-precious-metals/2012/08/sandeep-jaitly-heres-where-ludwig-von-mises-was-wrong-on-gold-2446408.html

1) If he is simply taking a "back to Menger" approach that's fine and admirable, but to call Mises "not an Austrian": whatever errors he may have commited, is borderline crankish, or just inteded to shock.

2) Yes, being overly concerned with who is or is not an Austrian is silly, so this is a silly thread - though I think this may be an extreme case of things. It is possible, this actually might be one of the few "line in the sands" where such a use of the term "Austrian" might be an important topic of "who is and who is not". The only other time I could see this comming in handy is if someone said "Menger has nothing to do with AE".

3) To call Böhm-Bawerk an Austrian and not Mises is even more odd. Supposedly his theory of Capital and Intrest Menger called "The greatest error in economics". Not that I'll get into this on this thread but: a case can, and probably should be made that von Weiser has just as legitmant, if not more so a claim to a "Megerian essence" of things than Bohm Bawerk. So why Bom and not Weis?

4) Yes, Jaitly and Keiser are not so hot with libertarians in this video, no need to point that out in this thread, it's boring stuff to me.