Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy
-
—“RE: BUT A PLANNER CANNOT KNOW WHICH RAILROAD IS ECONOMICALLY EFFICIENT TO BUILD”—
—“RE: BUT A PLANNER CANNOT KNOW WHICH RAILROAD IS ECONOMICALLY EFFICIENT TO BUILD”— (Responding only because some well intentioned fool ‘liked’ your reply) That’s false. Because all differences in economic productivity are reducible to time. Calculation is possible. The problem is competition that determines price, not the method by which price is calculated. You know, I have been working on this problem only since about 2001, and I know that Russo-Ukrainian Libertarianism was abandoned by intellectuals relatively quickly, but it’s still surprising that these nonsense arguments still persist. Mises was irrelevant. Rothbard was wrong. Hoppe took rothbard and restated it in the justificationary nonsense of Kant and the Marxists.But we’ve left behind justificationism along with it’s source – scripture. Science is exclusively falsifications: Darwinian.The real insights of Mises, Rothbard,and Hoppe are obscured.. …by pseudoscientific propaganda. We solve social science in a century when no one else did: Mises discovered operationalism in economics, rothbard and hoppe reduced all social science to reciprocity (property), and it is possible to construct a formal logic of LAW. Yet those who had a direct connection to rothbard or rand are still grasping at straws of rationalist falsehood. Science is complete. Philosophy is relegated to preference and good. And justification went the way of scripture. Just how it is. They only got it half right. -
the reason marx was wrong was that the principal beneficiaries of consumer capit
the reason marx was wrong was that the principal beneficiaries of consumer capitalism were consumers (labor). capitalism has been the great leveller of consumption. the only difference between the classes is the purchase of signal goods (really).
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 07:59:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974918089811857408
Reply addressees: @npdrifter @TorontoStar
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974860888317374464
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974860888317374464
-
It has always and always will be and it was menger, pareto, durkheim, and hayek
It has always and always will be and it was menger, pareto, durkheim, and hayek that explained why – and why it cannot be otherwise: knowledge, incentives, and the use of incentives to organize experimentation, production, distribution, and trade. value is created by organizing
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 07:53:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974916630370226176
Reply addressees: @npdrifter @TorontoStar
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974860888317374464
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974860888317374464
-
Marxism is based upon the error of the labor theory of value, and rather than ar
Marxism is based upon the error of the labor theory of value, and rather than argued scientifically uses Pilpul or “Dialectic” rather incentives, and every one of his forecasts were wrong. Socialism is impossible for the reasons of calculations, normative capital and incentives.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 01:03:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974813408771166208
Reply addressees: @npdrifter @TorontoStar
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974777100178620417
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974777100178620417
-
Sounds like a good plan. I mean, even if it doesn’t lower opioid deaths it will
Sounds like a good plan. I mean, even if it doesn’t lower opioid deaths it will at least do some good and drive up the price considerably. Better than most policy that does no good and drives up prices anyway.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 00:38:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974807068740931584
Reply addressees: @voxdotcom
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974786152673828864
IN REPLY TO:
@voxdotcom
Donald Trump’s White House plans to stop deaths from opioid abuse by putting more drug dealers to death. https://t.co/hwMyskHqLS
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974786152673828864
-
Why does the national debt matter if after inflation it’s largely a wash because
Why does the national debt matter if after inflation it’s largely a wash because it serves largely as a defense against inflation by institutions?
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 00:28:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974804552871546882
Reply addressees: @PeterSchiff
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974778343873830914
IN REPLY TO:
@PeterSchiff
That was quick. Today the funded portion of the national debt, which is just the tip of the national debt iceberg, surpassed 21 Trillion. Unfortunately it will break 22 Trillion before year end.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974778343873830914
-
Mises was only half wrong but fully irrelevant. Hayek was right and prescient: P
Mises was only half wrong but fully irrelevant. Hayek was right and prescient: Prohibit the bad and all that is left is good.And the means of incremental empirical suppression of the bad is the dry evolutionary process we call the judge discovered common law of tort: Reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 00:16:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974801562643070982
Reply addressees: @FriedrichHayek @BobMurphyEcon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
IN REPLY TO:
@FriedrichHayek
I’m rather shocked at how many fundamental mistakes @BobMurphyEcon makes in this article on Hayek, knowledge, Mises, and calculation. Stunned actually. https://t.co/rn3JZED9pi
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
-
7 – No one tries to advocate socialism. They try to achieve Pareto Maximums, whe
7 – No one tries to advocate socialism. They try to achieve Pareto Maximums, wherein the maximum extraction from the productive can be used to buy the fealty of the non, in order to extract rents, and denial of any science or reason.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 00:14:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974801137776783360
Reply addressees: @FriedrichHayek @BobMurphyEcon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
IN REPLY TO:
@FriedrichHayek
I’m rather shocked at how many fundamental mistakes @BobMurphyEcon makes in this article on Hayek, knowledge, Mises, and calculation. Stunned actually. https://t.co/rn3JZED9pi
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
-
5 – In all things, Mises was only half right, which is the problem we fall into
5 – In all things, Mises was only half right, which is the problem we fall into whenever we cherry pick what we measure. Hayek started with cognition, and worked through economics, and finally understood behavioral capital was created by TORT LAW, and all else was a consequence.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-17 00:06:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974799032559325185
Reply addressees: @FriedrichHayek @BobMurphyEcon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
IN REPLY TO:
@FriedrichHayek
I’m rather shocked at how many fundamental mistakes @BobMurphyEcon makes in this article on Hayek, knowledge, Mises, and calculation. Stunned actually. https://t.co/rn3JZED9pi
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
-
4 – Hayek was among the first to change the category of analysis from the physic
4 – Hayek was among the first to change the category of analysis from the physical to information -which is how all sciences function today. Mises was the first to discover economic operationalism but he understood math and science too poorly to understand what he’d done.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 23:58:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974797029288398849
Reply addressees: @FriedrichHayek @BobMurphyEcon
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449
IN REPLY TO:
@FriedrichHayek
I’m rather shocked at how many fundamental mistakes @BobMurphyEcon makes in this article on Hayek, knowledge, Mises, and calculation. Stunned actually. https://t.co/rn3JZED9pi
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/974765006825832449