<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>History</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/71.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)</generator><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/406833.aspx</link><pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 00:02:52 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:406833</guid><dc:creator>Wibee</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/406833.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=406833</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	Maybe he wanted mexico to fail. &amp;nbsp;:)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404357.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:05:30 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404357</guid><dc:creator>Daniel James Sanchez</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404357.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404357</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	Here is the source of confusion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Ebeling has a different definition of &amp;quot;business-like&amp;quot; than Mises. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Ebeling characterized Mises&amp;#39; management proposal as &amp;quot;business-like&amp;quot; because, as he said, it involved &amp;quot;strict rules and procedures&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	But, &amp;quot;strict rules and procedures&amp;quot; (or as Mises says in the quote I poste above, &amp;quot;detailed rules and regulations&amp;quot;) is precisely what characterizes &lt;strong&gt;un-&lt;/strong&gt;business-like management (bureaucratic management).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	In recommending &amp;quot;strict rules and procedures&amp;quot; for a government enterprise, Mises was recommending bureaucratic management, which is perfectly in keeping with his writing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404353.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:57:18 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404353</guid><dc:creator>Daniel James Sanchez</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404353.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404353</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
	&lt;p&gt;
		&amp;quot;&lt;a href="http://mises.org/humanaction/chap15sec10.asp"&gt;Bureaucratic&lt;/a&gt; conduct of affairs is conduct bound to comply with detailed rules and regulations fixed by the authority of a superior body. It is the &lt;strong&gt;only alternative &lt;/strong&gt;to profit management. Profit management is inapplicable in the pursuit of affairs which have no cash value on the market &lt;strong&gt;and&lt;/strong&gt; in the non-profit conduct of affairs which &lt;strong&gt;could also be operated on a profit basis&lt;/strong&gt;. The former is the case of the administration of the social apparatus of coercion and compulsion; the latter is the case in the conduct of an institution on a non-profit basis, e.g., a school, a hospital, or a postal system. Whenever the operation of a system is not directed by the profit motive, it must be directed by bureaucratic rules.&amp;quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	And if you&amp;#39;re familiar with Mises&amp;#39; writings of profit, you know it excludes the proceeds of any kind of government enterprise&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404352.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:44:08 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404352</guid><dc:creator>abskebabs</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404352.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404352</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	To be fair, he did recommend it as a second best option to privatisation, and the analogies he makes in Bureacracy don&amp;#39;t quite fit to this example as you&amp;#39;ve pointed out above.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	I&amp;#39;ve seen people point to the case of Singapore as an example of efficiently run, competitive but publicly owned firms. This might be worth looking into.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404351.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 16:33:58 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404351</guid><dc:creator>Prateek Sanjay</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404351.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404351</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;div&gt;And in a lengthy monograph that he wrote during the Second World War devoted to economic reform in an underdeveloped country like Mexico, he took as &amp;quot;given&amp;quot; that the politics of Mexican society was not ready to fully privatize, say, the national railway system or the oil industry. So as a &amp;quot;second best,&amp;quot; Mises proposed transforming the railway system into a government-owned but privately managed corporation with strict rules and procedures to assure it was run in a relatively &amp;quot;business-like&amp;quot; manner with the least likelihood of political interference. He even supported limited and temporary subsidies to assist poor Mexican farmers to establish themselves as more-successful private enterprisers.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	&lt;a href="http://mises.org/daily/4189"&gt;http://mises.org/daily/4189&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	He contradicted himself in actual work?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Well, let&amp;#39;s look at it this way.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Public operations normally include police stations, fire stations, or lighthouse operators.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	Industries typically include oil and railways.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	To ask nationally owned oil companies or railway companies to behave like a business is not the same thing as asking a police station to behave like a business.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
	So in fact, he did not recommend a public operation to behave like a public operation. Furthermore, police (in whatever form, even as contractors)&amp;nbsp;normally protect a single district - their benefit is non-exclusive and without the need for multiple highest&amp;nbsp;bidders to make it exclusive. In that sense, they are publicly availed. A state-owned oil company is state-owned, but NOT PUBLIC. It buys services from other businesses and sells oil to other businesses, with exclusive benefits to the highest bidder.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404344.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:47:35 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404344</guid><dc:creator>Daniel James Sanchez</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404344.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404344</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;
	That&amp;#39;s bizzarre. &amp;nbsp;Mises explicitly wrote that it made no sense to try to run public operations &amp;quot;like a business&amp;quot;, and that for them, there is no better alternative than bureaucratic management.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>von Mises in Mexico</title><link>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404339.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:18:44 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">944abf2b-d1be-4bf2-990d-438cb0e377e9:404339</guid><dc:creator>Prateek Sanjay</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/thread/404339.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>https://archive.freecapitalists.org:443/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=71&amp;PostID=404339</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;In Richard Ebeling&amp;#39;s The Other von Mises, we learn that von Mises advised the Mexican government.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;He did not advise privatization of the Mexican railways.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Instead, he simply advocated that the Mexican railways be run in a more &amp;quot;businesslike&amp;quot; and relatively&amp;nbsp;uninterfered form, while still leaving it in its government-controlled, government-funded form.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Were his proposals considered successful by him, his colleagues, or anybody who monitored the performance of Mexican railways after his suggestions?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>