[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 8teen / abdl / animu / asmr / fur / leftpol / strek / u ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


WARNING! Free Speech Zone - all local trashcans will be targeted for destruction by Antifa.

File: 94f5557f7c0e11e⋯.jpg (115.44 KB, 940x466, 470:233, hazlittmisescortneyfertig.jpg)

 No.77873

I just finished Human Action and I have some points that aren't super clear and I thought some helpful anons could help answer some of my questions. I didn't write what I was confused about so my questions won't be super specific. Sorry for being brainlet.

>Profit and Entrepreneurial Profit

Not really totally sure how they're different. I know Mises differentiated between economic and psychic profit, is this a similar sort of thing in that there is general profit and then there is strictly the entrepreneurial profit of business that is collected by the entrepreneur and distributed to himself and the shareholders?

>Monopolies do not earn profits.

I remember reading something like this and it seemed strange, am I mistaken or is this the case because that monopolies don't serve the traditional entrepreneurial role or for some other reason?

>Interest Rates

How does credit expansion affect the interest rates as opposed to inflationary and deflationary policies? Credit expansion seems to lower the rate of interest but deflation seems to raise it which seems strange to me because if deflation increased the value of money I would think that it would also lower interest rates.

>Non-neutrality of money

Mises describes how inflation affects prices unevenly but I am still a little unclear exactly how it does this.

>Consumption of capital goods

I just don't get this like in general, how do you consume capital goods? By just letting them deteriorate or something?

>The role of theory and empirical evidence

Mises critiques the mathematical economist and econometric for their reliance on empirical data that can only describe economic history but I was wondering if that Mises considered empirical evidence useful for proving or demonstrating economic theories. He doesn't seem to oppose it completely but I was wondering to what extent can historical or empirical data be used in economics according to Mises.

>Credit expansion

If a country embarks on credit expansion by issuing money substitutes or credit money (or something) then the gold reserves of the nation will flow out of the country leaving only the worthless bank notes. I remember this being brought up but the specifics were lost on me. I am also shaky about the differences between fiduciary media, money substitutes, bank notes, and commodity money and how they effect the market economy.

 No.77876

File: e3ac7f7be954bf0⋯.png (21.56 KB, 760x80, 19:2, earned income.png)

File: 0980868c92e8365⋯.png (124.77 KB, 770x453, 770:453, rent.png)


 No.77894

>>77876

I don't know how this is supposed to answer OP's question but I know dirty Keynesian rhetoric when I see it.


 No.77903

>>77894

Connect the dots yourself you brainlet


 No.77906

>>77873

>I just finished Human Action and I have some points that aren't super clear and I thought some helpful anons could help answer some of my questions. I didn't write what I was confused about so my questions won't be super specific. Sorry for being brainlet.

If you finished that book, then you're not a brainlet. Even many libertarians haven't read it in full. It's no problem if you cannot recall everything from it, guys like Hoppe or Murphy have read it more than twice because you cannot pick up everything in one reading.

>Profit and Entrepreneurial Profit

This article explains it well: https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Entrepreneurial_profit_and_loss

You were mostly right about it already, though.

>Monopolies do not earn profits.

>I remember reading something like this and it seemed strange, am I mistaken or is this the case because that monopolies don't serve the traditional entrepreneurial role or for some other reason?

I found this on a search:

>If conditions are such that the monopolist can secure higher net proceeds by selling a smaller quantity of his product at a higher price than by selling a greater quantity of his supply at a lower price, there emerges a monopoly price higher than the potential market price would have been in the absence of monopoly. Monopoly prices are an important market phenomenon, while monopoly as such is only important if it can result in the formation of monopoly prices.

Only under these additional conditions does it play a role that a monopoly exists. Normally, they don't behave any different from other businesses, so they should earn profit.

My guess is that if Mises said anything about them not earning profits, then it was a terminological thing. Nothing essential to know, in any case.

>Interest Rates

>How does credit expansion affect the interest rates as opposed to inflationary and deflationary policies? Credit expansion seems to lower the rate of interest but deflation seems to raise it which seems strange to me because if deflation increased the value of money I would think that it would also lower interest rates.

Credit expansion lowers the rate of interest in the same way that increasing the supply of any other good decreases its price. About deflation, this struck me as odd when you mentioned it, but it has probably to do with the boom-bust-cycles. When the price level readjusts itself downward, the interest rate rises. But in itself, deflation does not create a tendency for interest rates to rise.


 No.77907

Continued:

>>77873

>Non-neutrality of money

>Mises describes how inflation affects prices unevenly but I am still a little unclear exactly how it does this.

The money has to be introduced into the economy somehow. It's not like everyone suddenly has twice as much money as the day before, as in Humes famous example with the Archangel Gabriel. Instead, inflation works like printing counterfeit money. The counterfeiter has more money than everyone else, but prices haven't adjusted yet to what they should be under the new money supply. That happens gradually, as the newly printed money goes from person to person. This way, the purchasing power of everyones money supply sinks, so they're poorer than before. So inflation works like a distribution of income from those who get the money later to those who have it first. It's more complicated in practice how the Fed works, but based on the same principle. Hope that was understandable.

>Consumption of capital goods

>I just don't get this like in general, how do you consume capital goods? By just letting them deteriorate or something?

Whenever you produce something, you put stress on the capital goods, and in the long run, that destroys them. So every capital good is consumed in the process of production, but they're constantly being replaced. Not so when you cannot rationally allocate capital goods. In that case, capital is consumed faster than it is replaced, and so we can talk about there being consumption of capital goods in the economy as a whole. Call it a quirk of the language.

>The role of theory and empirical evidence

>Mises critiques the mathematical economist and econometric for their reliance on empirical data that can only describe economic history but I was wondering if that Mises considered empirical evidence useful for proving or demonstrating economic theories. He doesn't seem to oppose it completely but I was wondering to what extent can historical or empirical data be used in economics according to Mises.

Empirical data can neither prove nor disprove any economic theory. It is useful for economic history, as you said, and it also makes it easier for us to grasp economic theory. However, it can never overthrow economics. If we make a false prediction or fail to understand some economic phenomenon, then we must conclude that our observations are factually incorrect, or that we made a mistake in our a priori reasoning. If we know that our reasoning checks out, then by necessity, our data was incorrect.

In some rare cases, Mises did use empirical data, but never extensively. The one example I can think of is in his theory of labor, which has the "disutility of labor" as one of its premises. That labor has a disutility is not an a priori truth, but a trivial empirical fact.

>Credit expansion

>If a country embarks on credit expansion by issuing money substitutes or credit money (or something) then the gold reserves of the nation will flow out of the country leaving only the worthless bank notes. I remember this being brought up but the specifics were lost on me.

>I am also shaky about the differences between fiduciary media, money substitutes, bank notes, and commodity money and how they effect the market economy.

They all serve as mediums of exchange, but have different origins. Commodity money naturally emerges out of a barter economy when one commodity emerges that is more exchangable than all the rest, so that it gradually comes to be exchanged not for its usefulness as a commodity, but its usefulness as a medium of exchange. Examples are gold and silver.

Bank notes are essentially warehouse receipts for such a commodity money. Instead of one ounce of gold, you can pay with one paper bill, which you can then exchange for an ounce of gold at a bank. Bank notes are substitutes for the commodity money. They're also perfectly harmless by themselves, and even useful.

Fiduciary media are money substitutes that are not really backed by gold, silver or another commodity money. They're like normal bank notes, but cannot be exchanged for real money. There is nothing backing them, and that's what makes them dangerous. Unlike gold or silver, fiduciary media can be created from nothing, and that means there is no check on how much you can inflate them.


 No.77908

>>77873

>Profit and Entrepreneurial Profit

They're not quite different. He distinguishes that profit in general is a purely psychic phenomenon. The money or goods alone earned do not represent some exact definite quantity of satisfaction. Entrepreneurial profit deals strictly with the positive monetary difference from an economic investment. He mentions it specifically to highlight the importance of speculation and risk management in the market economy. A good deal of economists skip he entrepreneur all together or outright refuse to recognize him as useful. Thank Smith and Marx for that in particular. Funny how Ricardo did the same thing while being a stockbroker himself.

For anyone that cares to look through it again or hasn't, it starts on page 286 of the Scholar's Edition..


 No.77909

>>77873

>Monopolies do not earn profits.

You really should have given us the pages. Start taking notes when you're reading something.

https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Monopoly

"A state of affairs in which the monopolist, whether an individual or a group of individuals, exclusively controls one of the vital conditions of human survival."

Such a monopolist has the power to starve to death all those who do not obey his orders. A world-embracing socialist state would exercise such an absolute and total monopoly; it would have the power to crush its opponents by starving them to death. According to Ludwig von Mises, this type of monopoly "has no reference whatever to a market economy."[2]

This is likely what you're referring to. Such a monopolist would not be "selling" anything nor "losing" as there is no market for his goods.


 No.77929

File: 5176c5c8402b92e⋯.jpg (636.93 KB, 4096x2304, 16:9, cowen.jpg)

austrian economics debunked (redpill overdose)

TRIGGER WARNING: FACTS AHEAD!!

tl;dr

>gold standard is unstable and not a viable currency, susceptible to fraud and dependent upon mining

>they are openly anti-scientific, rely on "praxeology", they are philosopher at best

>dumb ideology funded by koch brothers think tanks (CATO) to convince ignorant armchair economists

>every prediction they had is proven wrong

>they business cycle theory is wrong

>they don't use scientific method, no maths, no statistics, nothing, just speculation

>only used as political rhetoric by ron paul to rile up his gadsen-flag hillbilly voterbase

>all of peter schiff's predictions are wrong, he has been preaching doomsday for decades

>mainstream economics agrees with less than half of their policy

>literally no respects austrian economists today, abandoned as early as 1950's

>only good thing to come out of it was Hayek, who wasn't even Austrian since he rejects praxeology. He contributed to price theory, and added to the socialist calculation problem. Also his philosophy is superior and way more nuanced compared to mises/rothbard.

top global econ journals, ZERO positive austrian results, all negative! outdated! wrong! pseudoscience!

https://academic.oup.com/qje/search-results?page=1&q=austrian&fl_SiteID=5504&allJournals=1&SearchSourceType=1

https://academic.oup.com/restud/search-results?page=1&q=austrian%20economics&fl_SiteID=5508&allJournals=1&SearchSourceType=1

https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/mac/search-results?within%5Btitle%5D=on&within%5Babstract%5D=on&within%5Bauthor%5D=on&within%5BjelCode%5D=0&journal=6&q=austrian+economics

https://www.aeaweb.org/journals/jep/search-results?within%5Btitle%5D=on&within%5Babstract%5D=on&within%5Bauthor%5D=on&journal=3&q=austrian+economics

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_economics

ihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_neoclassical_synthesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_consensus_of_economics

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220480309595230

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.nl/2017/04/economics-is-inexact-science.html

https://thesis.eur.nl/pub/39717/Master-Thesis-Nicolas-Bernerman.pdf

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1530995

https://recoveringaustrians.wordpress.com/top-ten-austrian-economic-lies-and-mistakes/

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm

https://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/top-ten-lies-and-mistakes-of-austrian-economics/

https://hallingblog.com/2015/09/08/praxeology-an-intellectual-train-wreck/

https://www.reddit.com/r/badeconomics/search?q=austrian&restrict_sr=on

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138469

http://www.econlib.org/library/Topics/College/marketfailures.html

https://www.colorado.edu/economics/morey/4545/introductory/marketfailures.pdf

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/1py0a8/eli5why_is_the_gold_standard_bad_feel_free_to/

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-criticisms-of-the-Austrian-school-of-economic-thought

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/eej.2012.32

you are getting (((nosed))) lolberts

https://www.economist.com/news/business/21711504-his-theory-management-inspired-austrian-school-economic-thought-worked-wonders

want to learn REAL economics? no problem, open source PDF book

https://openstax.org/subjects/

Blogs (neurtal-center right)

http://marginalrevolution.com/

https://uneasymoney.com/

https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/wiki/blogs

http://econlog.econlib.org/


 No.77965

unironically good OP and good responses.

i think what >>77876 was pointing out was that monopolies earn rent not profits.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 8teen / abdl / animu / asmr / fur / leftpol / strek / u ]