No.4658 [View All]
Economics datamining thread.
>Which school of economic thought do you feel you adhere to the closest? Austrian, Chicago, Neoclassical, Classical, Keynes, Marx?
>Which theory of value? Labor, subjective, cost, utils?
>Which theory of interest? Colorless, productivity, abstinence (PTPT), liquidity, renumeration, or exploitation?
>Which theory of the business cycle? Government control of the money supply? Animal spirits? Poorly regulated financial sector? Capitalism itself?
>Which theory of the entrepreneur? Knight's risk, Schumpeter's innovation, or Kirzner's alertness?
>Which theory of economic equilibrium? Mainstream "Consider a collection of demand curves that are monotonic…," the Austrian ERE, Hulsmann's counterfactuals, or Lachmann's notion that equilibrium does not exist?
>Which monetary standard? Gold standard, greenback, Bitcoin, labor-backed, fiat, or denationalized money?
>Which trade policy? Mercantilism, 'managed' trade, or free trade?
>Would you agree more with Say or Keynes?
>Are copyrights and patents a good idea?
>Are occupational licenses a good idea?
>Are minimum wage controls a good idea?
>Are other price controls (e.g., rent control) a good idea?
>Are worker unions a good idea?
>Are guilds a good idea?
>Are monopolies created by or destroyed by capitalism? Should the government have a role w.r.t monopolies?
>Which should or shouldn't be paid for by the government, or to what extent? Education, healthcare, housing, science, military, food, water, internet, telephone, roads, airports, ports, courts, pensions, weights/measures, post office?
>Which industries need regulation, and to what extent? Doctors, dentists, telecoms, finance?
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.5111
>>5107
>Crusoe Economics and time-preference with Hoppe, animated edition
I did not know I needed this, are there any others?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.5112
>>5111
>are there any others?
Nope.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.5190
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8241
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8256
>>4658
The economics of Ivan IV "the Terrible".
Boyars wanna hoard land/wealth and exploit the peasantry? Ok enjoy your prison cell, Ivan is going to seize all your shit. The end.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8265
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8266
>>8256
I'm essentially a post-Keynes guy but that sounds based.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8267
>Which school of economic thought do you feel you adhere to the closest? Austrian, Chicago, Neoclassical, Classical, Keynes, Marx?
between Keynes and Marx (though not a Marxist at all)
>Which theory of value? Labor, subjective, cost, utils?
Cost, Adam Smith style. technological progress fucked that up.
>Which theory of interest? Colorless, productivity, abstinence (PTPT), liquidity, renumeration, or exploitation?
none of the above, time preference
>Which theory of the business cycle? Government control of the money supply? Animal spirits? Poorly regulated financial sector? Capitalism itself?
Capitalism itself, it needs reformed
>Which theory of the entrepreneur? Knight's risk, Schumpeter's innovation, or Kirzner's alertness?
Schumpter, but turned on its head. it allows for technology to enroach private security
>Which theory of economic equilibrium? Mainstream "Consider a collection of demand curves that are monotonic…," the Austrian ERE, Hulsmann's counterfactuals, or Lachmann's notion that equilibrium does not exist?
competitive equilibrium
>Which monetary standard? Gold standard, greenback, Bitcoin, labor-backed, fiat, or denationalized money?
monetary authority
>Which trade policy? Mercantilism, 'managed' trade, or free trade?
I'd just opt for Protectionism
>Would you agree more with Say or Keynes?
Keynes
>Are copyrights and patents a good idea?
nah. interferes with creativity
>Are occupational licenses a good idea?
yeah, because of lawyers. its to prevent lawsuits
>Are minimum wage controls a good idea?
as long as its a living wage, its fine
>Are other price controls (e.g., rent control) a good idea?
I'm not a fan of landlords so I plead the fifth
>Are worker unions a good idea?
yeah as long as they are organized by trade
>Are guilds a good idea?
they're preferable to unions
>Are monopolies created by or destroyed by capitalism? Should the government have a role w.r.t monopolies?
created, because of corporate greed, which actually supresses markets
>Which should or shouldn't be paid for by the government, or to what extent? Education, healthcare, housing, science, military, food, water, internet, telephone, roads, airports, ports, courts, pensions, weights/measures, post office?
complete nationalization
>Which industries need regulation, and to what extent? Doctors, dentists, telecoms, finance?
most just the banks.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8273
>>8267
you look very confused to me
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8279
>>8273
how can I if you can't see my face?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8280
>>8279
Your post betrays a certain amount of confusion.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8283
>>8266
It’s not gommunism if you seize the traitors land and money to build churches…
And then dab on em.
B A S E D =IVAN=
Small business and landholders are mostly unhindered in a monarchy but it prevents large oligarchic factions from forming. Ideally speaking. Oligarchies do not run off “free market” principles, they coerce and bribe their way to controlling society. And an oligarchy is far more ruthless than even a mad king.
That’s why imo “free market” as libertarians use it is a term that doesn’t really even apply to real life. Maybe it does on a small scale, but even the word “free” has too many implications to count. Free in what sense? As in there’s no one holding a gun to your head when you buy cigarettes at the store? Okay. But what about the addictive nature of cigarettes? But what about the advertising you’ve been conditioned with? If advertising didn’t work they wouldn’t plaster this shit everywhere man. Pardon the rant. A communist party elite and an “capitalist” oligarchy function very much the same.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8284
>>8280
well I'm an anti-tech guy.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8285
>>8283
>doesn't know how to redtext
>>>/4cuck/
>Small business and landholders are mostly unhindered in a monarchy but it prevents large oligarchic factions from forming.
An oligarch by definition is someone who made his wealth with the help of the government, how the fuck are libertarians going to get an oligarchy without a government? A king also orders goods from certain companies and grants monopolies to others, thereby creating oligarchies. The past wasn't some kind of utopia, if it were then monarchies wouldn't have been overthrown in revolution by the unwashed masses.
>Free in what sense? As in there’s no one holding a gun to your head when you buy cigarettes at the store? Okay. But what about the addictive nature of cigarettes?
It's freedom from coercion, and you're "free" to fuck up your own life however you want because only you are responsible for it, it's only in your shitty utilitarian modernist society where you're forced to pay taxes for things like healthcare that you begin to worry about what other people eat or drink or what cigerrettes they smoke.
>A communist party elite and an “capitalist” oligarchy function very much the same.
Thank you, based centrist.
It's 80 IQ posts like this that prove why democracy is one of the biggest obstacles to a peaceful and prosperous society. Every illiterate pleb with an opinion and internet connection fancies himself a philosopher these days, you give these retards power over others and you have a recipe for disaster. With trash like this in society, it's no wonder we constantly get fucked over by politicians.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8288
>>8285
Repeat After Me: Nobody outside of dying demographics and savages savages accepts libertarians. The likes of the Chinese don't, and they're in a better position to maintain themselves than Honkies are.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8291
>>8285
>Russian Imperial flag
>autistically defends libertarianism
>calls others low IQ
lol
>thinks oligarchy is something the king creates
>anarchofag shitposting
Are sure you're on the right board?
>freedom from coercion
I was making a point about your nominalist understanding of freedom. I'm not a utilitarian, stop putting me in your philosophy 101 categories, slanderer. I could care less about your cigarrette consumption. The point is that to be free is to be moral. A person enslaved to the passions isn't free in the true sense, although a libertarian would swear up and down that freedom is just doing "whatever you want" - the plebian, nominalist understanding.
>based centrist
You entirely miss the point. We at /monarchy/ reject your post-French revolution dialectic of "right wing" versus "left wing".
Politics is not a linear spectrum big brain nibba. If it is, then it is a spectrum with monarchy at one end and oligarchy (left or right) at the other.
A conservative is a liberal from a few decades ago.
A libertarian is a liberal from a century ago. It was fools like these who overthrew the Tsar, NOT just the Bolsheviks.
>bitches about my red text mishap
>literally uses reddit spacing
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8295
>>8291
>The point is that to be free is to be moral. A person enslaved to the passions isn't free in the true sense
True enough.
>although a libertarian would swear up and down that freedom is just doing "whatever you want"
Wrong. You are hardly in a position to claim other people have a mere nominalist understanding of freedom when words such as these pass from your lips. Freedom is not liberating. There is no chain more binding, no burden more oppressive than to make a man responsible for his own actions. You want to be a bug chasing, fudge packing degenerate? Good luck with your AIDS and high-risk behavior making insurance costs skyrocket. You'll be barred from entry from any religious covenant community, as well as schools or any other building with lots of children. If your name is Tyrone, and you chimp out, trespass, or steal, you'll be be shot immediately, and no one will think twice about a man defending his property. No BLM protests, no fag pride parades, first because there's a no government for these parasites to influence and second because street owners won't allow it anyways. That is, assuming Tyrone even gets that far, since most businesses won't even let him through their doors, and most landlords wouldn't rent to him. Tyrone will be relegated to living in slums and ghettos with others of his own kind, far away from civilized men. Without the state serving as the civic religion, churches will rise to prominence once against, with all of the positive pressures that their commandments imply. Promiscuity is no longer subsidized by the state, but becomes socially unacceptable thanks to this. Instead of abortions, irresponsible young people will have no recourse besides shotgun weddings. The lie of egalitarianism, imposed and enforced by the state, will be no more. The natural order will take its place.
And yes, we are quite well-acquainted with this board. There exists a symbiotic relationship between monarchy and the free market natural order. They are both right-wing, or traditionalist if referring to things as right or left triggers you that much, that encourage low time-preference behavior and discourage high time-preference thrill-seeking. It is in the monarch's own interest to be hands-off in his rule and allow the market to be unrestricted, for this benefits his own coffers. The wholly free market is the purest expression of traditionalism, and monarchy is a very attractive second-best alternative.
>Politics is not a linear spectrum big brain nibba.
It really is. There are people who encourage rent-seeking, degeneracy, and the erosion of property rights on the left side, and people who discourage it on the right. The left favors a larger state which shields one's actions from consequences, the right favors a smaller state which does not. Feudal monarchy is on the right, about as far right as a form of government can be. The completely unrestricted market is a half-step further right than that.
>not knowing what redditspacing actually is
>calling every linebreak redditspacing
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8297
>>8295
The “pure free market” isn’t “traditional”. It has never existed as you are describing and never will. This is just utopian political animal nonsense. The fact that you subordinate monarchy to stateless society anarchoLARP ideology is disturbing.
Defending property holders is one thing, that has always been a political position. However property holders are subordinated to the king. In a stateless society there would be chaos and no property security. The Bible also defends property holders. However you do not have a “right” to be immoral. You do not have a “right” even to wish the king dead, that is treason. Your idea that the monarch is “second best” reeks of treasonous political animal behaviour. Anarchists believe political power only comes from the barrel of the gun. Who buys the gun and the bullets? Who pays the soldier? This idea that we can leave justice in the hands of the many is childish. Oligarchies will develop in that kind of environment. The state is actually a rather clumsy means of control. Psychological control as we see in the modern day is far more powerful. Corporate America has far more power than the US state, far more social engineering tools at their disposal. And don’t say “well true anarchy free markets don’t allow for oligarchies, reee”. They turn into oligarchies because the king is dethroned and the monied power is allowed to consolidate itself into a powerful position. In a society where the king is dethroned, money rules completely. Not justice.
>but it wasn’t real communism
>but it wasn’t real free market
>political animals so different bro
Anarchofaggotry didn’t exist 1000 or 2000 years ago, it has never worked for very long in all of history, just like communism. You had kings for most of human history. The modern state obviously didn’t exist until recently, but monarchy existed. That is traditionalism.
>nominalism
You agreed with my claim that to be free is to be moral, it has ==nothing== to do with subjective will. Yet your ideology preaches abstractions like the “rights” of the “individual”.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8298
>>8297
I fucked up the red text again. Damn.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8305
>>8297
>It has never existed as you are describing
Wrong.
>The “pure free market” isn’t “traditional”.
I didn't say it was traditional, I said it was traditionalist, do try to keep up. Which is to say it incentivizes men to act in traditionalist ways, while punishing those who deviate from those ways. The rest of your post is impotent wow-just-wowing with some low-IQ horseshoe theory mixed in, and really not worth the effort of responding.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8306
>>8305
The stateless you advocate has never existed.
It's not horseshoe theory. You are a radical liberal anarchist political animal. A linear spectum of politics is moronic.
At least the political compassfags have a bit more nuance to their view of politics.
"Traditionalist" meh, you are a political animal speaking in ideological gobblygoop.
The traditional approach to political life is not radical anarchism.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8307
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8308
>>8306
>radical liberal anarchist political animal. A linear spectum of politics is moronic.
You just learned to put these words together in the last week, didn't you?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8309
>bla bla bla
>muh rights
>muh anarchy
>muh [strawmen]
So much bullshit. If there was ever a reason I wanted a monarch in power, it's so that low IQ 4channers like this don't get a voice. By posts like this we see that democracy is intellectual bolshevism, it is a redistribution of intellectual resources to people who aren't thinkers or managers, but more suited to happily working at a farm or practising some kind of craft instead of dabbling in matters they don't understand.
Free-markets were never about rights as much as they were about responsibility and you are only responsible for your own life, you don't get to choose who makes what mistakes, how they spend their money, and just because you're a "monarchist" doesn't mean you can decide how your king rules his property either, and you certainly don't get to apply anachronistic Keynesian economics onto the monarchs of the past while pretending like you're "neither left nor right" just like 99% of the special snowflake ideologies out there.
At least you're not from reddit since you don't know what reddit spacing is, but you still needs to learn how to redtext before you fit in on 8chan.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8310
>>8309
I’ve never mentioned rights. You clearly want to strawman so I’ll let you have the last word. Clearly it’s very important to your ego. God bless you, I will pray for you.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8315
>mfw anons start using my terms
>>8298
Learn from the master of redtexts, kids.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8360
>>4658
Subjective theory of (economic) value is objectively correct.
Fiat is alright.
Some management of the economy is necessary to maintain a proper system of incentives. Free trade (regarding international commerce) tends to undermine the poor in developed countries.
IP protection incentives innovation.
Some jobs should require licensing, due to the potential danger to people.
Minimum wage laws are somewhat like a form of price setting, and price setting rarely works out well. Theoretically, if minimum wage laws are needed, it's a sign there's a problem somewhere else in your system. That said, our societies being highly agrarian wasn't that long ago, relatively speaking. It may simply be the case that we've not developed that far yet.
Worker unions are fine if they don't have undue power. Workers should not be strongarmed or forced to join unions. If a union cannot effectively bargain with purely voluntary membership, it either doesn't have a proper mandate or there's an issue somewhere else in the economy.
Guilds are outdated. Their advantages are no longer needed, so they mostly just have drawbacks.
An unregulated market will create monopolies. The government should take action to prevent the existence of monopolies except when a monopoly is essentially necessary.
Don't have a list I can whip out for government spending, but military, infrastructure, and education are definite. Some of it probably depends on circumstances.
Business in general needs some. If you mean specific to certain industries, anything where the job poses a threat to someone's health, life, etc (that goes beyond someone accidentally droping a hammer on you) needs some level of regulation. Lawyers too.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8361
>>8309
>The kingdom is the literal property of the king
This kind of thinking was out of date before the medieval ages had even ended.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8363
>>8267
>Cost, Adam Smith style.
>Unironically believing any theory of value other than subjective in the modern day
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8367
>>8363
Would you expect anything more from someone who describes himself as "between Keynes and Marx?"
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8372
>>8361
Then whose property is it? Certainly not "the people's" or any such nonsense. Feudal vassals had nominal control over the land, but by the definition of their oath that control was granted to them by the king, conditionally on continued loyalty.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8507
>>8367
lol. u mad? yeah u mad.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8509
>>8507
>act like retard
>get called a retard
<U MAD LMAO
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8536
>>8305
>I didn't say it was traditional, I said it was traditionalist, do try to keep up.
Wait, why isn't the free market a traditional system? I'd say gold standard capitalism was pretty traditional, right?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8537
>>8267
>complete nationalization
>Keynes
…You sure you didn't mean Marx?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8538
I'm in college right now, probably going to minor in economics just for the heck of it, but does anyone have good books on economics? Whether it be an intro to theory or specific flavors doesn't really matter to me.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8539
>>8538
Economics in one lesson is a good starting point for most people. Depending on what kind of classes you take, the economics you learn in college ranges from "functional but inferior" to "outright useless," so keep that in mind.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8540
>>8538
Hi anon, if I were you I would minor in something else unless you plan on becoming a central banker or a regular banker.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8541
>>8539
Thanks man. I will look that one up. And my school doesn't have a very robust economic department so I don't expect much, nor do I really care much since I end up teaching myself more than school does.
>>8540
That's a reasonable suggestion because I'm not interested in becoming either of those but the minor would be mostly to give me some ground in a more practical field. My major is (going to be) philosophy. I know, I know.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8561
>>8541
>My major is (going to be) philosophy. I know, I know.
Ultimately, I can't tell you what to do with your life. Who knows. Maybe you will become the next famous Austrian Economist like Hoppe (but better). When you end up writing your world famous book teaching the people about the wonders of monarchy, promise to remember us?
I'll be praying for you, peasant. God love you.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8576
>>4660
>the socialists who claim: everything is deterministic
Yeah that's not what socialists claim. Either way, if you are interested in the actual Marxist defense of the labor theory of value the top reply on this question should clear things up: https://www.quora.com/What-testable-predictions-does-the-Labor-Theory-of-Value-make
>>4675
I hope you are aware of the immense technological regress that this has to go along with. A modern industrialized society cannot co-exist with feudal social relations; even right-wing economic theorists realize this. Wanting to revert to monarchy is already fairly absurd but wanting to go back to feudalism is nothing but LARPing. If absolute monarchies would ever make a widespread return, it would still be in the service of capital (i.e. basically fascism under some sort of "monarchist" guise), not in the service of old-school nobility and feudal lords.
>>8309
<tfw you are such a high IQ aristocratic individual that you spend hours on 8chan shitposting about monarchism and redtext
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8609
>>8576
>Wanting to revert to monarchy is already fairly absurd but wanting to go back to feudalism is nothing but LARPing. If absolute monarchies would ever make a widespread return
Most feudalists stand in opposition to absolutists on this board, or sometimes they're both the same oddly enough. The autism this board presents sometimes.
>tfw you are such a high IQ aristocratic individual that you spend hours on 8chan shitposting about monarchism and redtext
Redtexting is a delicate craft on this board.
I don't think this board has seen a genuine leftist appear out of the blue in ages… do you want a pillow and some cold water while on your stay here?
>If absolute monarchies would ever make a widespread return, it would still be in the service of capital
We'll see about that.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8619
>>8576
>the socialists who claim: everything is deterministic
>Yeah that's not what socialists claim.
Are you using the Big Lie propaganda technique? I've met plenty of socialists who explicitly go down the path of determinism -> completely determined mathematical model of all human behavior -> mathematical function of all of society whose output is utils and input are the factors of production -> submit a computer to optimize this function
Where do you think Cybersyn had its genesis from?
Also, holy mother of god that link. If you don't post that over on /liberty/, Intelligentsia you better follow up.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8628
>>8576
>Marx
Go peddle your nonsense somewhere else.
Good day and God bless you.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8678
>>8628
Most things are deterministic except in action
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8679
>>8509
Retards are the world's saving grace but Fuck niggers.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8680
>>8537
Apparently between Keynes and Marx is Corporatism. I know enough about economies to get by but there are certain kinds that didn't get a school
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8721
I sympathize with the socioecological thought of Lewis Mumford and Pentti Linkola; which school of economic thought would suit me best?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8723
>>8536
Depends on how you look at it. You could argue that it is traditional in the sense that traditional, feudal governments were far less interventionist in the market. To that end, eliminating restrictions on the market could be seen as traditional. The part that is less traditional is the unrestricted market as an ideological ideal. Previous kings failed to restrict the market out of having no particular need to do so, rather than out of the belief that unrestricted markets were more productive.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.8767
>>8721
>Pentti Linkola
My based African brother
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.