Grayson:They figured out how to win according to the old public information rules. But, with the internet, the rules have changed.
The way I see it is that there's a kinked demand curve for economics. The major consumer of economics is the government; they need a theoretical rationalization for their absurd and destructive policies. The rest of the market consists of average people trying to understand the inner-workings of the economic system. Now the government will never accept Austrian economics--it would tie their arms, and we shouldn't expect a rational agent to purposely embrace an ideology which prevents them from carrying out their plans. The only thing we can hope for is that enough average people actually understand how the market operates, and that they change the current economic system. This is why, in my opinion, we need experts out there defending Austrian economics, and not well-intentioned novices who aren't equipped enough to deal with mainstream obfuscation.
Also, I don't think that the public will ever embrace free-market sound economics, and for a number of reasons: (1) they're too busy with their everyday lives to care about theoretical macroeconomics, (2) it's far too complicated for the average person to understand (or try to understand), and (3) the government has controlled the school systems for quite some time, indoctrinating and basically turning America into a nation of obedient drones who support and defend institutionalized theft. Look around today; people know that something is fundamentally flawed, and yet, they (majority) don't turn to free-market explanations, but rather to the money cranks and Marxists who are spreading theories about demonic evil capitalist Jew bankers (thanks to the internet).
Why read about Austrian capital theory when you can just blame "greed" and "speculation?" So I'm not as optimistic as many here. I don't think it's impossible, but we definitely need the most equipped out there fighting our fights.
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
Caley McKibbin: Grayson: According to Papola's Twitter: "Fear the Boom and Bust is now the 10th top rated News & Politics video of ALL TIME on YouTube" What is that number based on? It shows 855,168 views, which is not super high for youtube.
Grayson: According to Papola's Twitter: "Fear the Boom and Bust is now the 10th top rated News & Politics video of ALL TIME on YouTube"
According to Papola's Twitter:
"Fear the Boom and Bust is now the 10th top rated News & Politics video of ALL TIME on YouTube"
What is that number based on? It shows 855,168 views, which is not super high for youtube.
10th top rated, not most viewed...
Esuric:(2) it's far too complicated for the average person to understand (or try to understand)
They don't need to understand it on the "Time and Money" or "Prices and Production" level. It is enough to understand it on the "Meltdown" level, which is indeed accessible enough for the average person.
Esuric:(1) they're too busy with their everyday lives to care about theoretical macroeconomics
They may reach a point where they will make time.
I'm sure the thoughtful, literate men of the late Roman period were scouring the works of the Epicurans, Stoics, Neoplatonists, and Church Fathers, desperately trying to figure out what was going on as they're civilization was plummeting toward oblivion: but to no avail, because economic theory had not been discovered. But it just might be different this time...
Grayson:Before the rise of liberalism made continuous capital accumulation possible across generations, the common man held a gross underestimation of what his own species was capable of. He took it for granted that economic stagnation across millennia was simply an inevitable fact of life. He had no inkling that human society was capable of enormous strides in the standard of living within a single decade. If the average man had any notion of it at all, he would have shrugged at the fact that his own standard of living was not much different from that of the average man a dozen generations before him, or, for that matter, from an even more ancient forebear 1,000 years prior. And if the ruling caste lived high on the hog while the bulk of the populace remained mired in squalor, well that was just a fact of life, too. But that has irreversibly changed. The phenomenal increases in the well-being of man over the past centuries have exploded such lies. The common man knows he and his fellows are capable of wondrous achievements. And so, years from now, after the prodigious capital consumption engendered by the Federal Reserve and other government measures has reduced society to squalor again, the common man will not accept it. The ruling caste may insist to him that the new squalor is simply a product of circumstances brought on by the recklessness of certain private individuals, and that the maintenance of the rulers' own power and position are necessary to keep things from getting even worse (as the Fed is doing even now as it is confronted with but a mild curtailment of its powers). But the common man will not believe these lies. He will not accept a return to the old order. He has already tasted the fruits of capital accumulation. He knows civilization is capable of more than this, and that somewhere there must be a wrench in the gears of society: a problem too fundamental to be explained by just the reckless investing or heedless consumption of certain private individuals at a certain point in time. He will desperately look for this wrench, even if it means abandoning some of his most firmly held beliefs about government and society. He already knows from history that the students of Marx can't help him find it. And he will come to realize after a string of failed economic-rescue attempts that the students of Keynes and other mainstream economists don't know where it is either. But, if he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises and his students. And he will learn from Mises that the wrench in the gears of civilization is nothing else but the interventionist state. He might even then find the will and the nerve to yank out the wrench for good. Or he might not, and all will be lost. As the state brings the world deeper into the crisis of interventionism, civilization itself is nearing a fork in the road. It will be Mises or bust.
But that has irreversibly changed. The phenomenal increases in the well-being of man over the past centuries have exploded such lies. The common man knows he and his fellows are capable of wondrous achievements.
And so, years from now, after the prodigious capital consumption engendered by the Federal Reserve and other government measures has reduced society to squalor again, the common man will not accept it. The ruling caste may insist to him that the new squalor is simply a product of circumstances brought on by the recklessness of certain private individuals, and that the maintenance of the rulers' own power and position are necessary to keep things from getting even worse (as the Fed is doing even now as it is confronted with but a mild curtailment of its powers).
But the common man will not believe these lies. He will not accept a return to the old order. He has already tasted the fruits of capital accumulation. He knows civilization is capable of more than this, and that somewhere there must be a wrench in the gears of society: a problem too fundamental to be explained by just the reckless investing or heedless consumption of certain private individuals at a certain point in time.
But, if he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises and his students. And he will learn from Mises that the wrench in the gears of civilization is nothing else but the interventionist state. He might even then find the will and the nerve to yank out the wrench for good.
Or he might not, and all will be lost.
As the state brings the world deeper into the crisis of interventionism, civilization itself is nearing a fork in the road. It will be Mises or bust.
(article)
Grayson: Grayson:Before the rise of liberalism made continuous capital accumulation possible across generations, the common man held a gross underestimation of what his own species was capable of. He took it for granted that economic stagnation across millennia was simply an inevitable fact of life. He had no inkling that human society was capable of enormous strides in the standard of living within a single decade. If the average man had any notion of it at all, he would have shrugged at the fact that his own standard of living was not much different from that of the average man a dozen generations before him, or, for that matter, from an even more ancient forebear 1,000 years prior. And if the ruling caste lived high on the hog while the bulk of the populace remained mired in squalor, well that was just a fact of life, too. But that has irreversibly changed. The phenomenal increases in the well-being of man over the past centuries have exploded such lies. The common man knows he and his fellows are capable of wondrous achievements. And so, years from now, after the prodigious capital consumption engendered by the Federal Reserve and other government measures has reduced society to squalor again, the common man will not accept it. The ruling caste may insist to him that the new squalor is simply a product of circumstances brought on by the recklessness of certain private individuals, and that the maintenance of the rulers' own power and position are necessary to keep things from getting even worse (as the Fed is doing even now as it is confronted with but a mild curtailment of its powers). But the common man will not believe these lies. He will not accept a return to the old order. He has already tasted the fruits of capital accumulation. He knows civilization is capable of more than this, and that somewhere there must be a wrench in the gears of society: a problem too fundamental to be explained by just the reckless investing or heedless consumption of certain private individuals at a certain point in time. If he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises. He will desperately look for this wrench, even if it means abandoning some of his most firmly held beliefs about government and society. He already knows from history that the students of Marx can't help him find it. And he will come to realize after a string of failed economic-rescue attempts that the students of Keynes and other mainstream economists don't know where it is either. But, if he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises and his students. And he will learn from Mises that the wrench in the gears of civilization is nothing else but the interventionist state. He might even then find the will and the nerve to yank out the wrench for good. Or he might not, and all will be lost. As the state brings the world deeper into the crisis of interventionism, civilization itself is nearing a fork in the road. It will be Mises or bust.
Grayson:Before the rise of liberalism made continuous capital accumulation possible across generations, the common man held a gross underestimation of what his own species was capable of. He took it for granted that economic stagnation across millennia was simply an inevitable fact of life. He had no inkling that human society was capable of enormous strides in the standard of living within a single decade. If the average man had any notion of it at all, he would have shrugged at the fact that his own standard of living was not much different from that of the average man a dozen generations before him, or, for that matter, from an even more ancient forebear 1,000 years prior. And if the ruling caste lived high on the hog while the bulk of the populace remained mired in squalor, well that was just a fact of life, too. But that has irreversibly changed. The phenomenal increases in the well-being of man over the past centuries have exploded such lies. The common man knows he and his fellows are capable of wondrous achievements. And so, years from now, after the prodigious capital consumption engendered by the Federal Reserve and other government measures has reduced society to squalor again, the common man will not accept it. The ruling caste may insist to him that the new squalor is simply a product of circumstances brought on by the recklessness of certain private individuals, and that the maintenance of the rulers' own power and position are necessary to keep things from getting even worse (as the Fed is doing even now as it is confronted with but a mild curtailment of its powers). But the common man will not believe these lies. He will not accept a return to the old order. He has already tasted the fruits of capital accumulation. He knows civilization is capable of more than this, and that somewhere there must be a wrench in the gears of society: a problem too fundamental to be explained by just the reckless investing or heedless consumption of certain private individuals at a certain point in time. If he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises. He will desperately look for this wrench, even if it means abandoning some of his most firmly held beliefs about government and society. He already knows from history that the students of Marx can't help him find it. And he will come to realize after a string of failed economic-rescue attempts that the students of Keynes and other mainstream economists don't know where it is either. But, if he survives long enough, and if society does not descend into barbarism first, the common man might find the answer to his conundrum in the writings of Ludwig von Mises and his students. And he will learn from Mises that the wrench in the gears of civilization is nothing else but the interventionist state. He might even then find the will and the nerve to yank out the wrench for good. Or he might not, and all will be lost. As the state brings the world deeper into the crisis of interventionism, civilization itself is nearing a fork in the road. It will be Mises or bust.
He will desperately look for this wrench, even if it means abandoning some of his most firmly held beliefs about government and society. He already knows from history that the students of Marx can't help him find it. And he will come to realize after a string of failed economic-rescue attempts that the students of Keynes and other mainstream economists don't know where it is either.
This awesome.
Esuric:The major consumer of economics is the government; they need a theoretical rationalization for their absurd and destructive policies.
Esuric:Also, I don't think that the public will ever embrace free-market sound economics, and for a number of reasons:
What you say is true. But everything you describe in this post could be used in the script for the next video production (or feature length film?)
Now, for the first time, there seems to be an amazing confluence of events: The Mises Institute (ASC) + Papola's film making talent and inclinations. Austrian scholarship has provided the solid foundation going back to Menger, and we know about the Austrian Renaissance that began in the 1970's. Am I alone in thinking this could be the beginning of the Austrian Explosion?
"The market is a process." - Ludwig von Mises, as related by Israel Kirzner. "Capital formation is a beautiful thing" - Chloe732.
DD5:Ok, so he isn't an Austrian. But do you have to be an Austrian to understand the broken window fallacy?
When/where did Roberts use the broken window fallacy? He didn't in the link in the OP. He argued against government stimulus spending.
Political Atheists Blog
Supposedly, or at least, I heard over at RPF, that the interview was eseentially molded to be a certain way; I heard that roberts mentioned this on a blog somewhere and posted the link to the full interview, which isn't nearly as bad as the one PBS aired.
Resident Christian Anarcho-Capitalist.
Fox McCloud:I heard that roberts mentioned this on a blog somewhere and posted the link to the full interview, which isn't nearly as bad as the one PBS aired.
I believe this is the link referred to above. I listened to some of it. It's hard to stomach. Roberts is more relaxed and his responses are longer, but listening to about 5 minutes of the 2nd frame, I didn't hear any defense or description from the Austrian perspective. He seems like a mainstream economist slanted against government intervention, consistent with what has been described by others in this, and other, threads. I'll watch some of it, but I sense my impression won't change. (That statue of Keynes in the background doesn't help.)
Roberts PBS Full interview [warning, this can be nauseating]
You have to click on 'Statistics & Data'.
It will show you this:
If you then click on that top rated link it will take you here; which will show you the top rated list of 'News & Politics'; which will then show you that half of the videos listed under it are misplaced and are not Politics or News videos. It will however show you it's relative popularity of videos that are correctly placed under this category; but not of videos that should have been placed there and are not.
Basically it means people click 5 stars a very high percentage of the time, and that is has a lot of views; comparable with the Peter Schiff Was Right video and the Colbert White House Dinner speech.