Why argue with the Austrian School of Economics?
Published by Michael Greinecker on Monday, November 03, 2008 at 01:22In this (HT to Gabriel) strangely fascinating piece, Walter Block makes a very valid point.And no, it´s not about fractional reserve banking:
[Bryan Caplan] is, however, a bitter critic of all things concerning Austrian economics ([...]). On the other hand, in my view, Caplan is fast becoming a rising star among the neo-classicals; he writes voluminously and negatively about Austrian economics. But he always spells that name correctly, and, thus, garners far more publicity for us than would otherwise be the case. I would vastly prefer that mainstream economists attack praxeologists rather than ignore us. In that way, they set up targets for us, and better enable us to break out into the society at large.
Which is exactly why one shouldn't debate them that much. And by the way: "Austrian" refers to things coming out of Austria and "Economics" stands for a science, "Austrian Economics" is neither of them, which is why I used "Austrian school of economics". The wisest words on this have been said by Robert Solow when Interviewed by Arjo Klamer when attacking a far less deserving target:
Suppose someone sits down where you are sitting right now and announces to me that he is Napoleon Bonaparte. The last thing I want to do with him is to get involved in a technical discussion of cavalry tactics at the Battle of Austerlitz. If I do that, I'm getting tacitly drawn into the game that he is Napoleon Bonaparte.
Similarly, I certainly don't want to get tacitly drawn into the view that this school is a serious alternative to anything. I don't think one should feed delusions. Let´s read some Block:
Reading from here, I see the following:
"Yesterday at the FEE seminar, I got to hear the excellent Jeff Hummel thoroughly debunk the crazy Rothbardian view that fractional reserve banking is "fraudulent." It was fun (and funny) lecture, but the target was too easy."
I infer, then, that you guys, both of you, have published attacks on the "crazy Rothbardian view." I'm trying to put together a bibliography on both sides of this "easy" target, see below. Yet, I don't have anything from either of you on this list. Please send me the cites of your pubs debunking the Rothbard-Hoppe view that frb amounts to fraud, counterfeiting and theft.
WTF? One publishes criticism of important but misguided views, not on a target that is too easy. This reminds me of a book I heard about a long time ago (can someone help me out?). A guy published his correspondences with prominent figures such as Einstein or the pope. Which does of course notimply that they actually wrote back. I think that´s a natural evolution for the discourse on the Austrian school of economics.
P.S.: Those guys are really against fractional reserve banking? I really didn't expect that these guys want to destroy capitalism.
13 comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Typo. "Block". L, not R.
>> "P.S.: Those guys are really against fractional reserve banking? I really didn't expect that these guys want to destroy capitalism."
They would say--and I would agree--that franctional reserve is not necessary for "capitalism", but maybe you're using the word differently.
Evolutionists argue with the intelligent design crazies so why shouldn't you argue with the Austrian School?
At the very least explain why their wrong, if not going into a back-and-forth with them, seems like the job of academic economists.
Who are you anyway?
Is there something about your background that makes you so qualified to offer such sweeping critiques with such authority?
Why ask him who he is? Why not respond to his post instead?
BTW who are you? Why should we believe that you are qualified? Do you want us to take a detailed look at your CV and how many of your dozens of publications are really publications in top journals after 20 years of career? How many (if only there is one) of your papers are quoted outside the narrow confines of card-carrying Austrians or scholars interested in Austrian economics?
Becker will never hear the end of this. :-)
I'm confused. You're arguing that one should not argue with Austrian Economists exactly WHY? Because that would raise their profile, and then people would be exposed, and then WHAT? If Austrian Economics is so wildly incorrect, then it should be easily dismissed (a task which I notice you have not attempted here). If it's not so wildly incorrect, then why would it be a disaster for more people to know about it?
I don't see how your position is a winning one regardless of the quality of Austrian Economics.
"Evolutionists argue with the intelligent design crazies so why shouldn't you argue with the Austrian School?"
Intelligent Design is already in the spotlight.
"At the very least explain why their wrong, if not going into a back-and-forth with them, seems like the job of academic economists."
Well, they don't belong to academic economics.
"Is there something about your background that makes you so qualified to offer such sweeping critiques with such authority?"
A basic understanding of economics and philosophy of science.
"I'm confused. You're arguing that one should not argue with Austrian Economists exactly WHY? Because that would raise their profile, and then people would be exposed, and then WHAT? If Austrian Economics is so wildly incorrect, then it should be easily dismissed (a task which I notice you have not attempted here). If it's not so wildly incorrect, then why would it be a disaster for more people to know about it?"
Economics is complicated and few people are willing to follow the detailed argument. What they see is that there is a debate and, as the Baysian updaters they are, they assume there is some shred of legitamicy in their writings. Should John Baez analyse 322 papers of El Naschie?
"Well, they don't belong to academic economics."
But you presumably do.
Hehe, you guys have one hell of a definition of capitalism if it involves stuffing around with the money supply. Incidently, I wonder who predicted the crisis? Would it happen to be the economic advisor to the only congressman who follows the Austrian school? Check out this video for your answer and how stupid you look: http://www.garynorth.com/public/4251.cfm
"Incidently, I wonder who predicted the crisis?"
Robert Shiller, Nouriel Roubini
You are a moron.
See? I can rebut your feeble arguments against the Austrian School as easily as you presented them.