tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post5379856360800705552..comments2024-03-28T17:08:15.784-07:00Comments on Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: A Classification of LibertarianismLord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-59137478679337511782017-08-11T21:21:51.297-07:002017-08-11T21:21:51.297-07:00In wich classification you put to Vernon Smith?In wich classification you put to Vernon Smith?Josehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03360429566627299991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-32957926376618607992011-12-21T15:19:15.117-08:002011-12-21T15:19:15.117-08:00The belief that economic interventions by governme...<i>The belief that economic interventions by government work, and that there are many such interventions that should be done.</i> Characterizing "economic interventions by government" this way is part of the problem though. <br />A monetary economy is a government intervention. A job guarantee, a labor standard, full employment is the minimal government "intervention" necessary to balance the unemployment caused by the first 'intervention' of money & taxation causing unemployment. Non-monetary economies run on principles of reciprocity. That's what the JG is, the reciprocity of the otherwise insane government demand called taxation. <br /><br />The minimal sane or stable economy would be a night-watchman laissez-faire state, so low taxation but with a job guarantee. The JG would not employ many usually, because of the small size of government & hence taxation. But the small government would lead to financial instability as in the 19th century, so every now & then a crisis would lead to a quickly swelling JG force.<br /><br />Many/most Austrians want drastic state intervention: for the government to fix a price of the worthless commodity gold in terms of its intrinsically valuable "fiat" money. But why is the government running a Gold Shoppe so important, rather than buying & selling action figures or spray-on hair? No reason at all.Calgacushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06031818010224747000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-17651636714690605642011-12-21T08:30:56.261-08:002011-12-21T08:30:56.261-08:00Hi Mike,
Some quick responses:
(2) Second, it is...Hi Mike,<br /><br />Some quick responses:<br /><br /><i>(2) Second, it isn't obvious to me that Randians really have their own independent economics: I suspect they overlap several categories.</i><br /><br />Yes, the cult of Rand has no real independent economics: Rand herself seems to have mostly relied on Mises and Hayek.<br /><br /><i>(4) You do not diagnose Milton Friedman into any category.</i><br /><br />I think Friedman and modern monetarists, though some of them no doubt call themselves "libertarians", are mostly just mainstream economists: if I include them I should include the New Classical school (because in fact the monetarists are <i>more</i> interventionist than New Classicals), and then the list is open to the charge it is misrepresenting people.<br /><br />You could draw up a list of "extreme, strong or moderate pro-free market ideologues":<br /><br />(1) Libertarians<br />Randians<br />Austrians (Anarcho-capitalists, Misesians, Hayekians, moderate subjectivists, radical subjectivists)<br />non-Austrian libertarians <br />Robert Nozick’s libertarianism<br />David D. Friedman’s anarcho-capitalism<br />non-Austrian neoclassical libertarians<br /><br />(2) Mainstream neoclassical theorists <br />New Classicals<br />Monetarists<br />Supply-siders<br />conservative New Keynesians.<br /><br />http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2011/01/overview-of-major-schools-of-economics.htmlLord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-13171031389379949212011-12-21T08:05:04.610-08:002011-12-21T08:05:04.610-08:00'your post realies on the claim that "neo...'your post realies on the claim that "neoclassical economics is at the heart of libertarianism" which is false, especially if you consider the Lachmann branch.'<br /><br />I substantiated my claim comprehensively, and while I'm aware that libertarianism has evolved into different strands I think they all suffer from many of the same framing issues, which are ultimately derived from neoclassical framing.Unlearningeconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13687413107325575532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-15081899390691047772011-12-21T05:44:45.049-08:002011-12-21T05:44:45.049-08:00This is a perplexing classification because it is ...This is a perplexing classification because it is incompletely specified.<br /><br />(1) First, the unwritten part of the title is that this is a classification of libertarians by their economics, as opposed to their philosophy of anything else.<br /><br />(2) Second, it isn't obvious to me that Randians really have their own independent economics: I suspect they overlap several categories.<br /><br />(3) You are inconsistent if you allow Seligman to disavow libertarianism and not Randians. That empties category 3.<br /><br />(4) You do not diagnose Milton Friedman into any category.<br /><br />Could we maybe have something more cladistic?Mike Hubennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-413232923937774672011-12-20T14:00:45.855-08:002011-12-20T14:00:45.855-08:00"LK, you are wrong here. I am no less uncomfo..."LK, you are wrong here. I am no less uncomfortable with the libertarian label than I am with the Austrian one. In fact, you will be hard-pressed to find me ever identifying with a "movement" of any sort: I dislike them all, viscerally."<br /><br />If you have a set of values, you necessarily adhere to an ideology. Ideologies are self-styled movements. Of course, some movements are larger and some movements are smaller. <br /><br />A fear/dislike/avoidance of being labelled as part of a larger group is a movement that is very much akin to individualism.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-85595266765709165592011-12-20T12:37:58.316-08:002011-12-20T12:37:58.316-08:00"I am no less uncomfortable with the libertar...<i>"I am no less uncomfortable with the libertarian label than I am with the Austrian one. </i><br /><br />Apologies, then, I'll have to correct it.<br /><br />But surely you would regard yourself as a non-neoclassical economist, with a strong free market approach?Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-47183521801923947692011-12-20T12:34:11.211-08:002011-12-20T12:34:11.211-08:00LK, you are wrong here. I am no less uncomfortabl...LK, you are wrong here. I am no less uncomfortable with the libertarian label than I am with the Austrian one. In fact, you will be hard-pressed to find me ever identifying with a "movement" of any sort: I dislike them all, viscerally.George Selginhttp://www.terry.uga.edu/~selgin/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-41096787484494411462011-12-20T11:56:33.806-08:002011-12-20T11:56:33.806-08:00"Also Lk, I did not notice this before but wh...<i>"Also Lk, I did not notice this before but why do you consider Randians libertarians? They were, and still are, critical of libertarianism."</i><br /><br />I think you mean critical of all other people who don't follow their narrow cult? Cultists are like that.<br /><br />On a general level, there is no doubt that the cult of Rand favours extreme free markets but with a small night watchman state. Something like what Mises wanted.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-34474255150696994692011-12-20T11:53:01.736-08:002011-12-20T11:53:01.736-08:00"...but you haven't really dealt with the..."...but you haven't really dealt with the fact that they all share the same traits I listed, and those traits in turn come straight out of the economics textbooks."<br /><br />your post realies on the claim that "neoclassical economics is at the heart of libertarianism" which is false, especially if you consider the Lachmann branch. <br /><br />Also Lk, I did not notice this before but why do you consider Randians libertarians? They were, and still are, critical of libertarianism.Isaac"Izzy"Marmolejohttp://radicalsubjectivist.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-44813344864981705482011-12-20T10:21:37.264-08:002011-12-20T10:21:37.264-08:00There is actually a decent small debate about gove...There is actually a decent small debate about government and uncertainty on that 'Post' Austrian blog: http://austrianomnibus.blogspot.com/2011/03/in-response-to-paul-davidson.htmlIsaac"Izzy"Marmolejohttp://radicalsubjectivist.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-60567810244133715202011-12-20T07:20:12.888-08:002011-12-20T07:20:12.888-08:00Hmmmm I accept your characterisation of different ...Hmmmm I accept your characterisation of different strands of libertarianism but you haven't really dealt with the fact that they all share the same traits I listed, and those traits in turn come straight out of the economics textbooks.Unlearningeconhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13687413107325575532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-48055466009216197082011-12-20T06:58:53.317-08:002011-12-20T06:58:53.317-08:00"Government intervention cannot decrease unce...<i>"Government intervention cannot decrease uncertainty,</i><br /><br />Yes, it can. And the interventions that ended the freezing up of interbank lending markets in 2008 prove it can.<br /><br /><i>"for it has unintended consequences that mess up the coordination between economic agents, especially between investors and consumers."</i><br /><br />That assumes the nonsense of ABCT.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-61353828532003944652011-12-20T06:57:17.033-08:002011-12-20T06:57:17.033-08:00"Look up regime uncertainty "
As for &q...<i>"Look up regime uncertainty "</i><br /><br />As for "regime uncertainty" that was very probably a problem in the 1930s when the degree of government intervention being introduced in the economy was new, say in the US. New Zealand's experience with Keynesian stimulus in the 1930s shows there were no significant "regime uncertainty" problems: private investment surged as a result of government stimulus.<br /><br />The type of regime uncertanty contemplated by Higgs and others has long since ceased to be a significant problem in the modern world. <br />The main problem today is an overindebted private sector, delevergaing, a sick financial sector, and insufficient AD.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-70264422209136225992011-12-20T06:51:50.294-08:002011-12-20T06:51:50.294-08:00"the government cannot itself be certain of w...<i>"the government cannot itself be certain of what it will do."</i><br /><br />I wasn't asserting that absolute certainty must exist. In the realm of inductive reasoning, everyone with half a brain knows absolute certainty doesn't exist because inductive arguments only yield degrees of probablity.<br /><br />I said : <i>There is no doubt that a government intervention <b>can</b> affect a nonergodic process reducing uncertainty.</i><br /><br />That is correct.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-36714878865177139832011-12-20T06:43:32.416-08:002011-12-20T06:43:32.416-08:00"The belief that economic interventions by go..."The belief that economic interventions by government work, and that there are many such interventions that should be done."<br /><br />Too bad they don't work, and that no such violence should be done, or else your faith would have been knowledge.<br /><br />"I suspect that there are differences in the role of uncertainty. I think an economy is a complex set of both ergodic and nonergodic processes and phenomena."<br /><br />The market is not a mathematical system, it is a process of human interaction based on subjectively determined values.<br /><br />"There is no doubt that a government intervention can affect a nonergodic process reducing uncertainty."<br /><br />False. Government intervention cannot decrease uncertainty, for it has unintended consequences that mess up the coordination between economic agents, especially between investors and consumers.<br /><br />Look up regime uncertainty and why the government cannot itself be certain of what it will do.Christofnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-35643428683086383692011-12-20T06:22:36.037-08:002011-12-20T06:22:36.037-08:00The belief that economic interventions by governme...The belief that economic interventions by government work, and that there are many such interventions that should be done.<br /><br />I suspect that there are differences in the role of uncertainty. I think an economy is a complex set of both ergodic and nonergodic processes and phenomena. <br /><br />There is no doubt that a government intervention can affect a nonergodic process reducing uncertainty. <br /><br />Perhaps it is even possible to say that the Shacklean / Radical subjectivist / Post Keynesian emphasis on Knightian/radical uncertainty goes a little bit too far at times.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-57563029374526230462011-12-20T05:59:23.889-08:002011-12-20T05:59:23.889-08:00Lord Keynes, economically speaking, what are your ...Lord Keynes, economically speaking, what are your differences with Austrians like Ludwig Lachmann?ivanfoofoohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07899286403907746852noreply@blogger.com