Argentina defaults for second time

ghoti said:
My information is according to free market proponent Tony Leon (in his book). But it was back in like the 30`s or 40`s. When Argentina was building its middle class.
Click to expand...
Many free market proponents have held Argentina up as a booming economy of the 30's and at various intervals thereafter. The standard narrative is that when it is a free market Argentina does well but when it is a leftist military junta Argentina starts the path towards its recuring decline. The narrative is nice for making the case for a free market but it has many flaws - as evidenced by the real question of why Argentina has this perennial (or peronial :D) propensity towards this sort of outcome.
 
Ockie said:
Someone, please tell me I am not the only one that feel like a complete fcking moron when Paul posts????!!!!!!!!! :confused::confused:





:D
Click to expand...

Paul writes pretty clearly, I have no hassles understanding him, but unless you have studied some kinda economics, you will have difficulty understanding his speech. However, if he goes too far to the right and starts bringing in Mises praxeology into the discussion even my eyes will glaze over... but thats because praxeology redefines large parts of economic language to suite its arguments :D ( praxeology is a lot like scientology in its complete rejection of science, mathematical models and such and swopping those tried and trusted techniques for word salads) Though I dont think Paul is that far right of center.
 
ghoti said:
Paul writes pretty clearly, I have no hassles understanding him, but unless you have studied some kinda economics, you will have difficulty understanding his speech. However, if he goes too far to the right and starts bringing in Mises praxeology into the discussion even my eyes will glaze over...
Click to expand...

English, please :p:D
 
Ninja'd said:
English, please :p:D
Click to expand...

Mises is a far right libertarian economist from the (debunked) Austrian School of Economics.
praxeology is a word he used to describe his own type of 'logic' that ignores scientific evidence, the scientific method and such in favor of home made word salads.

Adherents of the Austrian school of economics study praxeology instead of mathematical models or use of the scientific method.
 
ghoti said:
Paul writes pretty clearly, I have no hassles understanding him, but unless you have studied some kinda economics, you will have difficulty understanding his speech. However, if he goes too far to the right and starts bringing in Mises praxeology into the discussion even my eyes will glaze over... but thats because praxeology redefines large parts of economic language to suite its arguments :D ( praxeology is a lot like scientology in its complete rejection of science, mathematical models and such and swopping those tried and trusted techniques for word salads) Though I dont think Paul is that far right of center.
Click to expand...

Ok now you guys are just fcking with me right? RIGHT? NO?

Ok, clearly I do not belong here.

/leaves


:p
 
Ockie said:
Ok now you guys are just fcking with me right? RIGHT? NO?

Ok, clearly I do not belong here.

/leaves


:p
Click to expand...

The last Austrian (psuedo)economist we had on this forum was Wild_Cat, not sure where he is these days. Guys like Nico and Paul are more to the left of the adherents of the Austrian school of economics (Im sure Mises would see Paul as a socialist :D ) . As far as I know, Paul and Nico dont reject empirical evidence, mathematical models or the scientific method so their economics is more mainstream :D If techne understood as much about economics as he did biology then I am pretty sure he would be in favor of the Austrian school of economics.
 
ghoti said:
Mises is a far right libertarian economist from the (debunked) Austrian School of Economics.
praxeology is a word he used to describe his own type of 'logic' that ignores scientific evidence, the scientific method and such in favor of home made word salads.

Adherents of the Austrian school of economics study praxeology instead of mathematical models or use of the scientific method.
Click to expand...
The Austrian school itself is far from debunked and if you consider the "salt water" vs "fresh water" divide as being essentially the emergence of the Chicago school which adopted sensible Austrian critiques and applied actual scientific method to them then as much as Friedman correctly said that everybody is a Keynesian by 1980 everybody was a Miseserian - and I'd argue with many dire consequences on the political front if you look at some of the disastrous implications of the intellectual laziness of policy advisers ...

Praxeology is simply intellectual laziness.

Mises really is a boring form of Nietzsche ...

I'd put it broadly as follows (and I am probably plagiarizing some of the explanation from ecos 2): many features of what was the Austrian school of economic thought until the 1960s are now taken as a part of economic orthodoxy with the result that the term Austrian school tends to be appropriated by the more heterodox views and whilst the Austrians include Hayek as a shining light of their cult much of the work of Hayek has been continued by Arrow and Sen - neither of whom are really acceptable to hardcore Austrians). Unfortunately there are prevailing sound insights that have emerged from the Austrian school and consequently it has the bizarre status of remaining a dominant heterodox school notwithstanding the intellectual bankruptcy of many of its disciples.
 
Paul Hjul said:
I don't think Argentina's real economy ever get into the top 10 in terms of size - and part of the problem is the a mismatch within the economy
but more to the point more than corruption etc ... it has been the consequence of a toxic mix of induced "supply side" economics (I always am torn between a lol and a gut wrenching cringe when "free market 'Mises proponents'" advocate shock treatment type interventions - there is a particularly toxic streak in US discourse that produces banana Republics as a natural consequence) and neo-Keynesian fiscal policies.
Click to expand...

Cryptic.jpg
 
ghoti said:
The last Austrian (psuedo)economist we had on this forum was Wild_Cat, not sure where he is these days. Guys like Nico and Paul are more to the left of the adherents of the Austrian school of economics (Im sure Mises would see Paul as a socialist :D ) . As far as I know, Paul and Nico dont reject empirical evidence, mathematical models or the scientific method so their economics is more mainstream :D If techne understood as much about economics as he did biology then I am pretty sure he would be in favor of the Austrian school of economics.
Click to expand...
Mises wouldn't see me as a socialist because he'd regard that as too kind a description ...

However the left vs right split doesn't really work here at all. Most proponents of the extreme right advocate Austrian School Semantics (ASS) because it allows them to be intellectually lazy (or often dishonest) whereas the general prevalence of the "left" in contemporary heterodox economics means that Fox News will call you all sorts of names if you give a dumb about the "maths". The situation was a little different in the mid-70s and 80s though and in the stead of ASS being the well funded bullsh[1]t (in the philosophical sense) New Development Theory largely was.
 
which-film-characters-are-the-25-biggest-movember-badasses-488344561-nov-14-2012-1-600x400-298x168.jpg
 
Paul Hjul said:
The Austrian school itself is far from debunked and if you consider the "salt water" vs "fresh water" divide as being essentially the emergence of the Chicago school which adopted sensible Austrian critiques and applied actual scientific method to them then as much as Friedman correctly said that everybody is a Keynesian by 1980 everybody was a Miseserian - and I'd argue with many dire consequences on the political front if you look at some of the disastrous implications of the intellectual laziness of policy advisers ...

Praxeology is simply intellectual laziness.

Mises really is a boring form of Nietzsche ...

I'd put it broadly as follows (and I am probably plagiarizing some of the explanation from ecos 2): many features of what was the Austrian school of economic thought until the 1960s are now taken as a part of economic orthodoxy with the result that the term Austrian school tends to be appropriated by the more heterodox views and whilst the Austrians include Hayek as a shining light of their cult much of the work of Hayek has been continued by Arrow and Sen - neither of whom are really acceptable to hardcore Austrians). Unfortunately there are prevailing sound insights that have emerged from the Austrian school and consequently it has the bizarre status of remaining a dominant heterodox school notwithstanding the intellectual bankruptcy of many of its disciples.
Click to expand...

Is there a book for dummies that explains all this? :p So I can get the basics :)
 
Nefertiti said:
Is there a book for dummies that explains all this? :p So I can get the basics :)
Click to expand...

lol, there are several - most of them have Introduction to Economics or Ecos 101 in the title somewhere :p

And Wiki is your friend - even if you've got to double check sources
 
Nefertiti said:
Is there a book for dummies that explains all this? :p So I can get the basics :)
Click to expand...

No idea...but I feel like if I gave him any money it would be like the South Park episode where the bankers talk some gibberish "aaaaaaand it's gone."
 
Paul Hjul said:
Mises wouldn't see me as a socialist because he'd regard that as too kind a description ...
Click to expand...

"You're all a bunch of socialists."
—Mises on hearing economists debating the merits of a progressive income tax.

Hehe


However the left vs right split doesn't really work here at all. Most proponents of the extreme right advocate Austrian School Semantics (ASS) because it allows them to be intellectually lazy (or often dishonest) whereas the general prevalence of the "left" in contemporary heterodox economics means that Fox News will call you all sorts of names if you give a dumb about the "maths". The situation was a little different in the mid-70s and 80s though and in the stead of ASS being the well funded bullsh[1]t (in the philosophical sense) New Development Theory largely was.
Click to expand...
Have the Austrians adopted the scientific method, mathematical models, empirical evidence and testable theories yet? Cause economics is a science, and until they adopt those fundamentals of science... its hard to take them seriously.
 
ghoti said:
"You're all a bunch of socialists."
—Mises on hearing economists debating the merits of a progressive income tax.
Click to expand...
But I am opposed to a progressive income tax ;)
Happy to debate the merits

Have the Austrians adopted the scientific method, mathematical models, empirical evidence and testable theories yet? Cause economics is a science, and until they adopt those fundamentals of science... its hard to take them seriously.
Click to expand...
I think the Austrian's adopted scientific method many years ago - otherwise how would Kelsen have function - ;) as to ASS I don't regard it as economics and certainly not as scientific: of course there is a philosophy of science discussion to be had and many problems many assertions as to scientific method that creeps in; falsifiability is a cornerstone of any science but the creation of a hypothesis is seldom a "sciency" exercise in the sense you are inferring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X