I believe that all things ultimately come down to an ethical principle, either good or bad.
The problem with anti-Austrian Economics isn't that it's bad economics, even tho' it is that, but that it's bad ethics. The principle that underlies all non-market economies is that it's not ok for you to break into your neighbour's house and rob him right under his nose, but that it is ok for the State to legislate by fiat law to rob him right under his nose. Supposedly, we are all stupid, and must have the State legislate in every area of life to save us from ourselves by redistributing wealth, among other things.
However, by the same token, I cannot follow the arch-Libertarian into the call to 'Abolish the State', becoz that's been tried and found wanting in the past. The State's only duty is the administration of the sword, of justice. Anything more than that is bad ethics, and will collapse under the weight of its own inefficiency. Anything less than that is bad ethics, basically asking for anarchy, which always ends in people ending up in a worse state than before.
The State must be limited, severely, not abolished.
Just quickly, I don’t post on these forums very often for a very good reason: most of them deal in economics, and I accept the Austrian economic approach at face value becoz it is, by Common Grace, Biblical. I don’t pretend to know or be terribly interested in debating it. But, as an orthodox Christian, when someone raises a question that bears directly on Christianity, that’s where my interest is, so my goal is to be educated and to educate. If I can have some fun along the way at some poor atheist sap’s expense, so much the better.