Austrian Economics Thread

if the fed hadnt stepped in at any time we wouldnt have had a 2008

>Tell me how it would have looked now.

Things havent improved, in fact they are much worse and the next recession its basically game over.

...

You gave them a legitimate reason to fck up over and over. How should that change in your future?

top kek, seeing this one for the first time, moar socialist memes please

What is exactly so bad? I know that inflation is running a little low, and the labor participation rate is few points off the historical mean. And we have sub prime auto loans to deal with.

But we are at near full employment, and middle class wages are starting to rise. Banks are stronger than ever.

What exactly is concerning you most?

>But we are at near full employment, and middle class wages are starting to rise. Banks are stronger than ever.

how can you BE this deluded

Proof of your skepticism Sir

Dilutional fiat cuckold who needs daddy gov to "step in" when he's been a bad goy.

delusional Austrian who goes through more boom and bust cycles and limits himself to how many shiny pieces he can dig out of the ground

i think austrian theory is superb for developed economies.
for developing economies its an invitation for others to come take your national assets

But are we not on the verge of the next technological revolution? How do you suppose the free market will take care of that?

Why are you posting a picture of Friedman? He was not an Austrian and advocated for government management of the money supply.

what revolution

Energy, and automation. Within the next generation households will be self sufficient generating their own power as solar roofs become ubiquitous.

Then you have automation. Trucks and cars will be automated. This translates to roughly 6 million jobs alone. Then think of all the jobs that support these two industries. Your looking at of at least 60 percent of your labor being made redundant.

elon pls

in the same way when tractors replaced farmers and all other technology we have today.,

A tractor made man more efficient. This next tractor replaces the man

with the excess of capital generated by technology there will be funds for entirely new sectors of things that machines cannot do.

Will it be fast enough to counter the mass layoffs?

shit isn't just going to happen all in one day...

It will happen quickly. I'm sure you already know truck driving is the larger employer of people is almost all states.you think we can find new jobs for all those people

who cares as long as there are sex robots?

>no bullshit school of economics
>literally rejects testing its hypotheses

mises.org/library/praxeology-methodology-austrian-economics
>the praxeological method is, to say the least, out of fashion in contemporary economics as well as in social science generally and in the philosophy of science [because it does] not meet the fashionable criterion of "falsifiability"
>But what if we subject the vaunted "evidence" of modern positivists and empiricists to analysis? What is it? We find that there are two types of such evidence to either confirm or refute a proposition: (1) if it violates the laws of logic, for example, implies that A = -A; or (2) if it is confirmed by empirical facts (as in a laboratory) that can be checked by many persons. But what is the nature of such "evidence" but the bringing, by various means, of propositions hitherto cloudy and obscure into clear and evident view, that is, evident to the scientific observers?

translation for brainlets: "science doesn't real it's just fashionable! p.s. if reality doesn't agree with my theories then reality is wrong." - austrian 'economist'

>"if you're not austrian you're keynesian." - every mises.orgfag

>translation for brainlets: "science doesn't real it's just fashionable! p.s. if reality doesn't agree with my theories then reality is wrong." - austrian 'economist'

wrong

Praxeology does not throw away empiricism from Austrian Economics, it only displays the impossibility of using science in cases such as the 2007 recession, where you won't be able to fully create pre-crash conditions and scientifically manipulate the market and test the outcome.

Denying praxeology this way is like denying its primary self-evident axiom of people existing and acting to meet goals.

>Why would we ignore this and let people needlessly suffer from their irrational decisions.
Fuck you, why should I suffer for their irrational decisions instead?

Tell me personally how you are suffering? Inflation is low, interest rates are low. Businesses have easy access to capital, the stock market is at historical highs.

What is the problem in your life?

>bailing out banks benefits me and my life

so, he assumes that you can predict for shit and therefore let's just do whatever the fuck we want with 'science'. you should tell that to a physicist...

But the savings that the companies make on automation is not passed on. They profit more while workers compete for less jobs and starve in the streets.

"The government should step in when necessary."
WHO makes that call?

People are irrational
>let's concentrate power in the hands of the few and possibly have them elected by popular vote - leftists 2017

Precisely. I was making a point of why the Austrian dream will not work in an advanced nation

It has nothing to do with being left or right. Keep those oversimplified definitions to yourself. Having a central bank is a far cry from a full on socialistic nation.

People who are elected and trained to manage the economy. Contrary to what you have been told, the Fed actually has a great track record

Profits are passed on consumers. As well as taxes.

If it becomes cheaper to produce a good the company may try to keep the extra profits to itself, but it is more than one company producing the good and in order to attract customers they will lower the price as they can afford to do so, the sales will increase, other companies would also have to decrease the prices in order to compete. The price regulates itself to a new level reflecting a cheaper product for the consumer and additional revenue for the consumer, a win/win and wealthier nation.

...

>trained to manage the economy

ie spending someones money on someone else needs

which will always result in economic inefficiencies, centrally planned economies always fail, look at what is going on in Venezuela

>Contrary to what you have been told, the Fed actually has a great track record

Really? Robbing people by printing money?

Who was robbed? I was never robbed. Were you? There is very little inflation, so no secret tax as you Austrian's call it.

And since there was no large scale unemployment as a result, I say people were helped not robbed.

depends on the central planning.
china is doing pretty well

Keynesian economics has the funny job of demonstrating to man how little we know about what we imagine we can design.

increasing the supply of money decreases its value, reducing your purchasing power

China is only communist in its name, since 20 years it is capitalist. Today china is more capitalist than the USA.

capitalism =/= free market/command economy
china has planning all the way down

Only major sectors are state owned, such as energey, banking etc, the rest of the sectors can enjoy more freedom than in US

Well we calculate that and it's called inflation. It had been running at a very healthy 2 percent. If your worried then start hedging and you can make money with everyone else.

paulcooijmans.com/economics/fallacies.html

read

>A constant inflation rate of about 2 % is good for the economy, serves as a lubricant

This is likely the most evil fallacy in economics. Of course, inflation is bad, because it rewards bad behaviour (like making debts, spending money, consuming more than one needs) and punishes good behaviour (saving, being frugal, consuming only what one needs). Inflation is a tool to confiscate value produced by the conscientious, creative, productive, hard-working, frugal, and redistribute that value among the wasteful, the unconscientious, the unproductive, the borrowers, the parasites, the pleasure-seekers.

The idea behind this fallacy is that inflation encourages people to buy things now because prices will be higher in the future, and that the mere buying of things (consumption) is "good for the economy", even when people buy things they do not really need, and even when they buy those things with money that is not their own but borrowed (inflation encourages borrowing because it reduces the value of one's debts). But obviously, economic growth that results from consuming more than one needs, and from doing so with borrowed money, is empty, bad for the ecology, and does not reflect a real increase in value but rather the opposite.

>actually believing that

>by the conscientious, creative, productive, hard-working, frugal, and redistribute that value among the wasteful, the unconscientious, the unproductive, the borrowers, the parasites, the pleasure-seekers.

So it helps the people who are acutally taking chances and risks, instead of people who just want to clock in and out and drink beer on the week end. And thats a problem

Inflation just allows for the economy to grow at a faster rate than would otherwise.

You say it causes people to buy things they don't need. Well we live in a world where needs are very easily met, so if they are getting what they WANT I am very happy for them.

Inflation is nothing to worry about. Again if it scares you invest in assets that historically beat inflation.

>Inflation is nothing to worry about.
loosing at least 20% over 10 years is surely nothing to worry about

> Again if it scares you invest in assets that historically beat inflation.
Why should I be forced to decrease the liquidity of my money by investing into assets?

It isn't mere inflation that is the problem of printing money, it is the instability and crashes caused by it. With an excess of money we invest into things which are not viable to maintain after when the fictionally created money runs out. This also applies any kind of money-aid and gives the same results as Greece for example.

The next thing you will tell me that the minimum wage regulations are a good thing.

Top kek
Look at what the people who actually work at the fed say before and after they leave their position and compare it to what they did while in power

20% over ten years is a worry
Posting in a crypto forum

>there can't be a monopoly if there is no government
that has to be the most retarded thing I have ever read.

what does physics have to do with economics? You can't fully predict things in economics because they're based on (irrational) human behavior

Eve online begs to differ.
Unregulated economies end in catastrophe.

So money sitting idly is productive? Everything should be put to use. Everyone tries to allocate their resources efficiently, and I agree this is not always possible. But before central banking we still had a business cycle. Bad investments and Over leveraged investors have always existed. Now we can at least reduce their destructive capability

r u serious? the fed fucking bailed out the banks. the "recovery" sent wealth back to the upper class while the middle class got a middle finger up their ass

desu you can't even predict most things in physics. The 3 body problem remains unsolved as it is a chaotic system and minimal variations of starting conditions can lead to massively different solutions over time.
And it's just Newtonian mechanics, go figure fluid mechanics for example.

also op why did you use a fucking milton friedman pic for the top?

monopolies today like compast rely on regulations on the bottom.

Yes the fed replaced the value that was lost by the crash. It took an entire nation to be blinded by greed for it all to happen. So everyone was bailed out. Lot's of people have 401ks and IRAs that were helped out by the actions of the fed. It isn't a one way street.

> blinded by muh greed
SEE: Community Reinvestment Act, Glass-Stegall Repeal, Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac, Government backed Subprime morgatges

not everyone was bailed out:

eml.berkeley.edu//~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2012.pdf