Ron Paul Rises

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-01-12 23:42

Now, I don't know the difference between Chicago and Austrian economics. Greenspan worshipped Ayn Rand. Which one did he follow again?

**Kuya** · 2012-01-12 23:44

Former, but Chicago and Austrian economics are related. Chicago economics received influence from Hayeck and Hayeck was read in Austrian Economics.

**Pirian** · 2012-01-12 23:49

I'm not sure if you're being sincere in your questioning (I'm not even sure if you're asking about Ayn Rand here, or Greenspan), but Rand followed Austrian Economics, according to wiki.

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-01-12 23:49

Interesting, because here's a 2001 article from mises.org about how Greenspan's policies are inspired by the Austrian school of economics which Greenspan studied in the 60's.

http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=338

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-01-12 23:53

Could it be that economists are rarely proselytizing in a vacuum, are usually aligned with business interests, and will intentionally and knowingly distort whatever "economic principle" is handy to support the view they need supporting?

You study economics in order to avoid being fooled by economists.

**Pirian** · 2012-01-12 23:56

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Could it be that economists are rarely proselytizing in a vacuum, are usually aligned with business interests, and will intentionally and knowingly distort whatever "economic principle" is handy to support the view they need supporting?

[/I]

Real question, would you do the same if it meant you would be a decamillionaire overnight? Corruption is hard to fight because it literally happens like that

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-01-12 23:56

Supporters of Mises like Guartz would clearly dissassociate himself from Greenspan now that the housing market burst, declaring that any failures of Greenspan's were due to not following Austrian economics closely enough. Of course mises.org itself in 2001 was eager to find evidence that Greenspan (back then basically an American hero, especially right before the dot-com burst) was inspired by Mises and the Austrian school.

**archibaldcrane** · 2012-01-12 23:57

Originally Posted by Pirian

Real question, would you do the same if it meant you would be a decamillionaire overnight? Corruption is hard to fight because it literally happens like that

Of course. That's my point.

**Kuya** · 2012-01-13 00:02

That's their usual MO. Claim that the a practioner of free market capitalism failed because he just wasn't a true believer.

**SwampdonkeyPLD** · 2012-01-13 00:20

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Interesting, because here's a 2001 article from mises.org about how Greenspan's policies are inspired by the Austrian school of economics which Greenspan studied in the 60's.

http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=338

It looks like they limited their support to the specific testimony mentioned in the article.

**aurik** · 2012-01-13 00:23

You'd have to be pretty ignorant to make that argument.

**aurik** · 2012-01-13 00:24

Greenspan is a modern American hero, sorry if you can't see why.

**SwampdonkeyPLD** · 2012-01-13 11:50

Originally Posted by aurik

You'd have to be pretty ignorant to make that argument.

The closest they came, in that article as I have no idea about others, is that he was influenced by Ayn Rand.

**guartz** · 2012-01-13 20:04

The main theme in that article is that Greenspan essentially knew what he was doing, and you can infer that he knew the bust would happen, although they don't go out and say it directly.

**Andalusian girls** · 2012-01-13 20:06

Originally Posted by guartz

Just to illustrate my point, here is an article by two career fed economists from chicago school in 2004.
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/e.../0412mcca.html

housing? bubble? Hahaha.. don't worry.

and here is a paper from a professor @ mises, in 2004.
http://mises.org/daily/1533

yes clearly two marginal members of the school making a wrong prediction is enough to discredit an entire economic theory

**Andalusian girls** · 2012-01-13 20:07

Originally Posted by Kuya

Economics has a bad reputation of being a nest of ideologues. It's funny, because at first i thought economics would be the most pretigious social science, you know, because of the math. Little did i know that some people put it on the same league as sociology.

i've always found it closest to psychology

**guartz** · 2012-01-13 20:12

Originally Posted by Kuya

That's their usual MO. Claim that the a practioner of free market capitalism failed because he just wasn't a true believer.

Nobody in mises would agree with that statement, not because they are blinded by zealous fanaticism, but because you can't say free market capitalism when the money being used is essentially communist.

**guartz** · 2012-01-13 20:15

Originally Posted by Andalusian girls

yes clearly two marginal members of the school making a wrong prediction is enough to discredit an entire economic theory

yes, senior vice president and ass. vice president in the fed's research firm are small timers.

**Kerberoz** · 2012-01-14 01:51

Originally Posted by Andalusian girls

i've always found it closest to psychology

In that some aspects are strictly scientific, some are scientific but interpreted poorly or applied outside their reach, and some are pseudoscientific personality-cult bullshit? Yeah, I'd say that fits.

**Kuya** · 2012-01-14 21:50

Originally Posted by Andalusian girls

i've always found it closest to psychology

Most social sciences (if not all) are by default full of politics and ideologues. It's unfortunate but that's what happens when you have a vested interest in your subject of study and experimentation is practically impossible.

Kind of like the misperception that you can'd do experiments with theoretical physics attracts lots of loons.

Thread: Ron Paul Rises

Thread Tools

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads