Podcasts about bb t professor

Join me for Episode 119 of the Let People Prosper Show with Dr. Peter Boettke, a Distinguished University Professor of Economics at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, and the Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. He recently received the Public Choice Society's highest academic honor for his significant contributions to Public Choice scholarship.In our conversation, Pete discusses the evolution of economic thought, the importance of education in shaping economists, and the role of government in economics. We explore personal experiences that led them to economics, the influence of key figures like Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek, and the challenges of public governance. The discussion emphasizes the need for economic literacy, the importance of rules in policy, and the future of economic thought in addressing contemporary issues.Please share and rate the Let People Prosper Show wherever you get your podcasts, visit vanceginn.com for more insights, and subscribe to my newsletter for show notes at vanceginn.substack.com.

This week's guest on the Mixtape with Scott is someone I've admired for a very long time, even before I entered graduate school in 2002. Peter J. Boettke is the Distinguished University Professor of Economics and Philosophy, the Director of the F. A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. It's hard to summarize just how important Peter has been to the story of Austrian economics, but in my mind, he's been one of the most influential people in that long tradition, both for his scholarly work on political economy, public choice and institutions, his leadership at George Mason, where the Austrian tradition has continued to thrive, and as a mentor to young people. I can only speak to myself, but I have looked up to Peter for a very long time as it was always very clear that he was a humble and serious scholar who also gave an incredible amount of time and mentorship to his students. All of those are to me examples of what I find to characterize some of the best of the profession's larger story, and so it was a real pleasure for him to sit down with me to talk about his career. I found it so interesting to hear his story in his own words, the economists he looked up to as a young person, his genuine love of economics, as a field, and how much he holds up his students and colleagues. Thank you, as always, for taking the to tune in. I hope you enjoy this time with Peter as much as I did. Scott's Substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Scott's Substack at causalinf.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode, Shruti speaks with Peter J. Boettke about the writings of F.A. Hayek, why artificial intelligence will not solve the knowledge problem, what many economists throughout history misunderstood about the market process, mainline vs. mainstream economics and much more. Boettke is a Distinguished University Professor of Economics and Philosophy at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism and the director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. He has written dozens of books, including “The Battle of Ideas: Economics and the Struggle for a Better World,” “The Economic Way of Thinking,” “Living Economics: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow” and, most recently, “F.A. Hayek: Economics, Political Economy and Social Philosophy.” Recorded June 8th, 2023. Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links. Follow us on Twitter Follow Shruti on Twitter Follow Pete on Twitter Click here for the latest Ideas of India episodes sent straight to your inbox.

Prof. Boettke and I discussed Austrian economics, the nature of incentives and why they matter, what philosophers and economists can learn from each other, whether free markets can hold as the West loses faith in them, and a whole lot more.Peter Boettke is a University Professor of Economics and Philosophy at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, and the Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jimmyalfonsolicon.substack.com

How did F.A. Hayek influence the course of economic history? What is the fate of his liberal project in the 21st century? Are we on the road to serfdom? Tune in to the latest episode of the Governance Podcast featuring Professors Mark Pennington and Peter Boettke. Subscribe on iTunes and Spotify Subscribe to the Governance Podcast on iTunes and Spotify today and get all our latest episodes directly in your pocket. Follow Us For more information about our upcoming podcasts and events, follow us on facebook or twitter (@csgskcl). The Guest Peter Boettke is a University Professor of Economics and Philosophy at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, and the Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. As a teacher, Boettke is dedicated to cultivating enthusiasm for the economic way of thinking and the importance of economic ideas in future generations of scholars and citizens.  He is also now the co-author, along with David Prychitko, of the classic principles of economics texts of Paul Heyne's The Economic Way of Thinking (12th Edition, Prentice Hall, 2009).  His efforts in the classroom have earned him a number of distinctions including the Golden Dozen Award for Excellence in Teaching from the College of Arts and Sciences at New York University and the George Mason University Alumni Association's 2009 Faculty Member of the Year award. In 2005, Boettke received the Charles Koch Distinguished Alumnus award from the Institute for Humane Studies and the Jack Kennedy Award for Alumni Achievement from Grove City College.  Boettke was the 2010 recipient of the Association of Private Enterprise Education's Adam Smith Award as well as George Mason University's College of Humanities and Social Sciences Distinguished Alumnus of the Year Award. In 2012, Boettke received a doctorate honoris causa in Social Sciences from Universidad Francisco Marroquin.  In 2013, Dr. Boettke received his second honorary doctorate from Alexandru Ioan Cuza University in Romania. Dr. Boettke served as President of the Southern Economics Association from 2015 - 2017 and President of the Mont Pelerin Society from 2016 - 2018. He also is the Editor of the Review of Austrian Economics and the Associate Editor of the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. Skip Ahead 0:50: Why did you decide to write this new book about Hayek? 5:10: It's interesting that you divide Hayek's work into four phases: Phase 1 is economics as a coordination problem… Phase 2 is the abuse of reason project… Phase 3 is the liberal principles of justice… and Phase 4, where he is addressing these concerns of cultural evolution. The book focuses on the first three phases—why did you decide to break the book down this way? 13:20: I think the common core of those three phases is the idea of Hayek developing epistemic institutionalism… what do you mean by this term? 17:44: Reading Hayek over the years, the idea of ignorance has always struck me as absolutely essential to his project- the idea that agents are not fully rational, that they stumble around in the world, they are purposeful, and they have limited information processing powers. And what we have to do is think about how institutions enable them to cope and to learn in these very non-ideal circumstances. 18:55: Why do you think there are so many misconceptions about what Hayek actually said? You'll repeatedly hear people say that Hayek's case for the market assumes that agents are fully rational or fully informed—or if they're not fully informed, the price system acts as a surrogate for perfect information. 24:08: To push back on the way economics is taught, I definitely agree that if you look at the dominant textbooks, market failure is a dominant theme. I think that what some people in that movement are suggesting… is the idea that the economist's model, the 101 model, starts from the assumption of there being some kind of a market, and then you talk about there being market failures which the government might correct. But the idea that the market is the primary mechanism of resource allocation is taken as given. What Knight and Johnson say is that you shouldn't start with any presumption in favour of anything- a market or anything else… Institutions should be more about negotiating that uncertainty. The Econ 101 model doesn't really recognize that problem. Is that a fair argument? 27:18: Hayek's argument is that, in a democratic, pluralistic society, we are not going to be able to agree on ends… so the only thing we can agree on is the means by which we interact with each other. [What if we disagree on the means, too?] 31:04: Let me ask you a little about Elinor Ostrom. One of the characterizations you get of Hayek goes something like this: he made very important arguments based on the limits to human knowledge that a broadly competitive market system helps people overcome those limitations more effectively than some kind of top down or centrally planned economy. There are many people now across the political spectrum who would accept at least part of that argument… but they would then say, for example, that we've learned from people like Elinor Ostrom that there's more to economic allocation than markets and states. 42:36: The Hayekian critique of the central planner is that the planner can't have access to the information which needs to feed into prices… the Ostrom argument which is analogous is that a central rule-maker can't frame rules to overcome collective action problems given that the circumstances of time and place which affect those collective action problems on the ground are radically dispersed across many different sorts of agents… so you need to have something like a discovery mechanism. 48:15: In the same way that Hayek sees competition between firms as a kind of discovery procedure where firms can copy the successful models and avoid the failing ones-- likewise in a polycentric order where we've got multiple decision centres which are public entrepreneurs, if you like, who are trying to cope with collective action problems in different ways, the different localities can observe what other localities are doing to try to learn themselves how to adapt to their own particular condition. 52:38: You mentioned that reconstructing the liberal project is a key part of… Hayek's work. If we're thinking about today's world, many people would argue that that project, in so far as it has been implemented (or attempted), is actually collapsing. We've got declining faith in free trade, protectionism is on the rise, we have a much greater scepticism of markets of any time in the last 30-40 years. Is there anything in Hayek's attempt in that 1960-80 period… that can help us address these problems? 1h:02: One mechanism to deal with our human divisions is democracy. The problem there is that people like myself think that cosmopolitanism is wonderful and we embrace creative destruction… but there are others who see creative destruction as the destruction of their identity.  

My guest today is Peter Boettke, an economist of the Austrian School. He is currently an economics and philosophy professor at George Mason University; the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, Vice President for Research, and Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at GMU.  The topic is his book F. A. Hayek: Economics, Political Economy and Social Philosophy (Great Thinkers in Economics). In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: Trade deficits Trump politics Politics in the marketplace Zero sum game Jeff Bezos and rent seeking The market for privileges Merchant class mentality Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

Peter Boettke is economist of the Austrian School. He is currently an economics and philosophy professor at George Mason University; the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, Vice President for Research, and Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at GMU. His newest book is “F. A. Hayek: Economics, Political Economy and Social Philosophy (Great Thinkers in Economics).” Peter got hooked on economics during college after being hired for his first job – digging pools. He saw taxes being taken out of his pay and personally felt the negative effects. The philosophy behind why his checks were being garnished didn’t sit well with him. Rather than be frustrated, he got fascinated with the way economics worked and quickly saw there was something obviously wrong with the way government was ran. Along with signing up for all the economics classes he could, Peter went to the library and read. He had “a-ha” moments in those reading sessions that has molded him to be the economist he is today. Michael and Peter touch on a broad scope of topics including: What is Peter’s perspective on President Trump’s view of trade wars and tariffs? Should intellectual property be protected? What is rent seeking and how does it relate to Jeff Bezos? What separates the American entrepreneurial spirit from entrepreneurs overseas? In this episode of Trend Following Radio: Trade deficits Trump politics Politics in the marketplace Zero sum game Jeff Bezos and rent seeking The market for privileges Merchant class mentality

Peter Boettke is Professor of Economics and Philosophy at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, and the Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.   This is Professor Boettke's second time being featured on the Economic Rockstar podcast. You can listen to Peter's first interview in episode 82 at www.economicrockstar.com/peterboettke Professor Boettke is also the author of 'Living Economics', a book in which he decided to hand over all his royalties from its sale to help sponsor scholarships for students to attend Universidad Francisco Marroquin Guatemala City, Guatemala. According to Milton Friedman, it is "one of the leading universities in Latin America.”

Peter Boettke is Professor of Economics and Philosophy at George Mason University, the BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism, and the Director of the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Peter is now the co-author, along with David Prychitko, of the classic principles of economics texts of Paul Heyne's The Economic Way of Thinking. Professor Boettke’s most recent book, Living Economics, provides a resource for how teachers and students can engage in many fascinating questions in economics and illuminates the core principles that should guide our thinking. Peter’s efforts in the classroom have earned him a number of distinctions including the Golden Dozen Award for Excellence in Teaching from the College of Arts and Sciences at New York University and the George Mason University Alumni Association's 2009 Faculty Member of the Year award. Peter’s research has primarily been in the area of comparative political and economic systems and the consequences with regard to material progress and political freedom. Check out the show notes page for all the links, books and resources mentioned by Peter at www.economicrockstar.com/peterboettke

Garett Jones is Associate Professor of Economics and BB&T Professor for the Study of Capitalism at the Mercatus Center, George Mason University. His book, Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters so Much More than Your Own is the subject of this episode. The book deals with an empirical puzzle: IQ is a weak predictor for earnings. We all know high-IQ people who live paycheque to paycheque, and lower IQ people who succeed brilliantly. And yet, when we look at the relationship between nations' average IQ scores and their incomes, the relationship is strong. Nations with the highest average IQ scores are eight times wealthier than nations with the lowest IQ scores. How can we resolve this apparent contradiction? Garett documents five main channels for the spillover effects of IQ: 1. Smarter people are more patient, they save more and build up more capital. When economists test people's patience, high-IQ people tend to be more willing to wait for a larger amount of money in the future rather than taking a smaller sum now. This is important at the national level because savings tend to stay within a country* and fund investments within that country. That means living in a higher IQ nation generally means having more capital available to compliment your labour. 2. Smarter groups are more cooperative. Economists use the iterated prisoner's dilemma as an idealized scenario where cooperation is at odds with people's individual, short-term incentives. Jones looked at the many times economists have studied this in experiments and correlated the cooperation rate in these experiments with the SAT scores of the schools the study participants were drawn from. He found that higher SAT schools produced more cooperation in the iterated prisoner's dilemma. In later research, Al-Ubaydli, Jones, and Weel (2014) found that higher IQ groups were more cooperative, but higher IQ individuals were not. A high-IQ person in a low-IQ group would not foolishly cooperate when everyone else was defecting, but high-IQ groups could coordinate on a cooperative solution despite not knowing that they were in a high-IQ group. 3. Smarter people are more informed voters and are more likely to support market-oriented policies. Caplan and Miller (2010) document the tendency for high-IQ people to think like economists. 4. Smarter groups make more productive team members. Jones uses "O-ring" technologies (drawing on an idea from Kremer (1993)), in reference to the fatal part that cause the Challenger disaster, to show how high-IQ workers can be indispensable in many sectors of a modern economy. While many economic models assume substitutability between high- and low-skilled labour (e.g. three low-skilled workers can do the work of one high-skilled worker), O-ring sectors don't have this feature. When one mistake can completely destroy a project, low-skilled workers can have effectively negative marginal products. 5. Peer effects cause those with high-IQ peers take on the behaviours of high-IQ people, implying that low-IQ people in high-IQ countries will be more patient, cooperative, informed, and productive than low-IQ people in low-IQ countries. It's well documented in the social science literature that people take on the behaviours of their peers. This effectively multiplies the positive effects of the first four channels by making low-IQ people behave like high-IQ people. Jones sees a virtuous cycle between IQ and development. Higher IQs lead to better economic outcomes, and better economic outcomes lead to better health outcomes and higher IQs. But despite the great importance of this subject, people have been extremely reluctant to research differences in IQ between groups for fear of finding an unpalatable result. One of Jones' aims in writing this book is to make it more acceptable for people to do research in this area. We also discuss Jones' recent debate with Bryan Caplan on the subject of open borders. Jones' work on IQ spillover effects give us reason to use caution in supporting open borders.   *This is actually another economic "paradox" that economists don't fully understand. One would expect savings to be invested where they face the highest returns, regardless of national boundaries, but that seems not to be the case. REFRENCES Al-Ubaydli, O., Jones, G., & Weel, J. (2014). Average player traits as predictors of cooperation in a repeated prisoner's dilemma. Caplan, B., & Miller, S. C. (2010). Intelligence makes people think like economists: Evidence from the General Social Survey. Intelligence, 38(6), 636-647. Jones, G. (2008). Are smarter groups more cooperative? Evidence from prisoner's dilemma experiments, 1959–2003. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(3), 489-497. Kremer, M. (1993). The O-ring theory of economic development. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 551-575.