Podcast appearances and mentions of Carl Menger

Al 365 (!) afleveringen praten we je bij over wat er in de bitcoin- en cryptowereld gebeurt. Deze week gaat de aandacht uit naar Las Vegas, waar een grote bitcoinconferentie startte. Je hoort erover van onze Amerika-correspondent Bart. Daarnaast brengen vragen van luisteraars ons bij interessante onderwerpen, zoals bitcoin‘subsidie' en de visie van Carl Menger op het HODL'en van bitcoin. We sluiten de aflevering af met een beschouwing op een enigszins saaie markt: Wat verwachten we van de komende handelsweken?Probeer Bitcoin Alpha 2 weken gratis!Satoshi Radio wordt mede mogelijk gemaakt door: Amdax, Watson Law, HVK Stevens en onze hoofdsponsor Bitvavo.Timestamps(00:00:00) Welkom en Podcast Introductie(00:10:44) De heffingen van Trump(00:20:40) Missende bitcoin boogie(00:23:00) Vraag over de Block Subsidy(00:27:00) Vraag over Bitcoin Knots(00:33:00) Carl Menger en Use it or Lose it(00:41:30) Bart in Vegas(00:56:10) Bookmark: Kraken komt met tokenized equities(01:03:40) Bookmark: Bitcoin mag weer op Amerikaanse pensioenrekeningen(01:11:00) Bookmark: Hoe lang moet je wachten op het volgende bitcoin block?(01:21:30) Bookmark: Circle kondigt beursgang aan(01:24:00) Marktupdate(02:17:04) EindeBookmarksBert:https://twitter.com/paddi_hansen/status/1926945307591344638Kraken takes Wall Street onchain with tokenized equities“If the last block was mined 7 mins ago, when will the next block be mined?”Circle kondigt beursgang aanBlackRock en ARK tonen interesse in CRCLPeter:Regering VS trekt negatief koopadvies cryptovaluta inRegering VS gaat alle anti-crypto toezichthouders ontslaanTrump staat achter bitcoinwet van Lummis…nadat hij zelf 2,5 miljard in bitcoin steekt?

On this episode, Erwin Dekker chats with Director Tomasz Agencki on the making of "Notes on the Margin" (2024), a full length documentary on the life and legacy of Carl Menger, founder of Austrian economics. Despite limited archival material and conflicting accounts, Agencki crafts a visually rich story highlighting Menger's intellectual journey and reformist spirit.Tomasz Agencki is a freedom-focused movie maker who travels around the world to cooperate with like-minded creators. Agencki has over 15 years of experience in film and tv production, directs and films many of his own documentaries, and is a professional audiobook voice artist. Watch Agencki's “How Sweden Quit Smoking” (2024) or find his other works here.If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Virtual Sentiments, a podcast series from the Hayek Program, is streaming. Subscribe today and listen to season three, releasing now!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramLearn more about Academic & Student ProgramsFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

Notre commanditaire : Jean Sébastien Lebrun, Avocat / Lawyer, Associé / Partner T: 514-866-9842Dans cet épisode, les animateurs plongent dans les fondements de l'École autrichienne d'économie. Ils discutent des origines de cette école de pensée. Des précisions sur l'individualisme méthodologique de Carl Menger et le rôle du Cercle de Vienne. Trois axes majeurs de la pensée autrichienne sont explorés : le processus de marché, la dynamique de l'interventionnisme et la critique des banques centrales. Une discussion animée autour de la déflation et de la concurrence monétaire conclut cette première partieLes abonnés Patreon profitent du cours 8 de Vincent Geloso. À partir de la courbe de Preston, il explore le paradoxe des famines en contexte de croissance en examinant des pistes explicative. L'épisode se termine sur une note discussion discussion qui rappelle les dérives des années covid, notamment un sondage qui disait que 27% des canadiens étaient prêts à emprisonner les dissidents sanitaires.0:00 Commanditaire  0:49 Introduction et livre d'Antoine Bernier  2:40 Annonce semaine prochaine et Q&A  4:32 L'École autrichienne  6:23 Individualisme méthodologique et Carl Menger  11:50 Vincent n'est pas autrichien, MAIS  13:05 Le Cercle de Vienne  14:20 Trois livres de référence  15:53 1. Le processus de marché  20:12 AUCUN socialiste  25:12 Le Cercle de Vienne (partie 2)  32:54 2. Dynamique de l'interventionnisme  39:36 3. Critique des banques centrales  53:19 Sur la déflation  57:02 La concurrence monétaire  1:02:50 Conclusion et vers Patreon  

In this episode, we dive into bitcoin's impact on the future global monetary order with Natalie Smolenski, an anthropologist and bitcoiner. We discuss her thoughts on how bitcoin challenges the state's monopoly on currency, invoking Karl Marx's unexpected agreement that gold, a commodity, originally embodied money—not the state-minted currencies. Natalie explains her fascination with the concept of the invaluable—elements of culture and society that transcend monetary value—and how bitcoin fits in today's culture. We also tackle bitcoin's role as a deflationary currency in contrast to fiat's inflationary tendencies, highlighting its potential to redefine economic and social hierarchies. Join us as we explore bitcoin's potential to reshape not just economies but cultural identities.SUPPORT THE PODCAST:→ Subscribe→ Leave a review→ Share the show with your friends and family→ Send us an email podcast@unchained.com→ Learn more about Unchained: https://unchained.com/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=TBF-podcast-description→ Book a free call with a bitcoin expert: https://unchained.com/consultation?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=TBF-podcast-description→ Buy bitcoin in an IRA—sign up today and get your first year free: unchained.com/frontier→ Meet Natalie in Austin on April 16th: https://www.meetup.com/bitcoin-park-austin/events/306342336/TIMESTAMPS:00:00 - Intro01:12 - Natalie's journey into bitcoin02:19 - Anthropology and the concept of value06:06 - Modern monetary theory and social power10:09 - Central banking and national economic performance15:12 - The challenge of physical currencies and the role of central banks20:27 - Money as the most salable good: Carl Menger's insights26:17 - Debunking the myth: Bitcoin and collective hallucination30:01 - Bitcoin as a protocol for new societal frameworks34:10 - Bitcoin's potential impact on societal structures38:23 - The state's interest in bitcoin and potential risks42:27 - Legal challenges and the future of bitcoin ownership45:24 - The future of privacy, property, and political action in the bitcoin eraWHERE TO FOLLOW US:→ Unchained Twitter: https://twitter.com/unchainedcom→ Unchained Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/unchainedcom → Unchained Newsletter: https://unchained.com/newsletter → Joe Burnett's Twitter: https://twitter.com/IIICapital→ Jose Burgos (Director of Media Production) on Twitter: https://x.com/DeFBeD→ Natalie Smolenski's Twitter: https://x.com/NSmolenski

Rafael García Iborra es el autor de Principios de economía financiera, un libro que ofrece una teoría financiera basada en la tradición austriaca iniciada por Carl Menger en 1871. Partiendo de conceptos como el subjetivismo de los fines y medios elegidos por los individuos, la incertidumbre, la liquidez y el proceso de mercado como un elemento coordinador de carácter descentralizado, Rafael García Iborra propone un marco conceptual que permite entender el funcionamiento de los activos financieros, comprender los errores y aciertos de la teoría financiera neoclásica y avanzar en el desarrollo de los aspectos financieros de la teoría austriaca del ciclo económico. A lo largo de esta sesión Rafael nos presentará la obra y algunas de sus ideas principales.    Rafael García Iborra es CFA charterholder y doctor en Economía. Ha desarrollado su carrera profesional en el ámbito de los mercados financieros, especializándose en el mercado de renta fija y desempeñando puestos de trader, analista fundamental de crédito y gestor de fondos de inversión. También ha ejercido de profesor de finanzas en programas de posgrado de varias escuelas de negocios. 

Exploring Market Economics – with Matthew GeigerMichael sits down with Matthew Geiger, a scholar and researcher at the Carl Menger Institute for Market Economics. Currently pursuing his Ph.D. in Economics at Rey Juan Carlos University under the guidance of Professor Philipp Bagus, Geiger shares his insights on Austrian economics, free markets, and the challenges facing economic policy today.Michael Leibowitz, host of The Rational Egoist podcast, is a philosopher and political activist who draws inspiration from Ayn Rand's philosophy, advocating for reason, rational self-interest, and individualism. His journey from a 25-year prison sentence to a prominent voice in the libertarian and Objectivist communities highlights the transformative impact of embracing these principles. Leibowitz actively participates in political debates and produces content aimed at promoting individual rights and freedoms. He is the co-author of “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime” and “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” which explore societal issues and his personal evolution through Rand's teachings.Explore his work and journey further through his books:“Down the Rabbit Hole”: https://www.amazon.com.au/Down-Rabbit-Hole-Corrections-Encourages/dp/197448064X“View from a Cage”: https://books2read.com/u/4jN6xj join our Ayn Rand Adelaide Meetups here for some seriously social discussions on Freedom https://www.meetup.com/adelaide-ayn-rand-meetup/

Inspírate, crea nuevos proyectos y expande tu conocimiento en http://www.newmedia.ufm.edu Organizado por: Centro Henry Hazlitt https://chh.ufm.edu/ Facebook @UFM.CHH Una producción de UFM Studios http://newmedia.ufm.edu

One of the fallacies of modern academic neoclassical economics is that we can take cardinal measures of value. Austrian economists, beginning with Carl Menger, know better.Original article: Prices Are Not Measurements of Value

durée : 00:58:20 - Entendez-vous l'éco ? - par : Aliette Hovine, Bruno Baradat - Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) est un économiste autrichien libéral convaincu. Dans les pas de l'école autrichienne fondée par Carl Menger, Mises forme à New York la troisième génération de cette école qui défend l'auto-régulation des marchés sans intervention étatique. - réalisation : Françoise Le Floch - invités : Christel Vivel Enseignante chercheuse à l'UCLy et enseignante à l'ESDES Business School; Nathanaël Colin-Jaeger Post-doctorant en philosophie politique à l'université américaine de Paris

The iconic Hermès Birkin bag helps illustrate Carl Menger's “Theory of the Good,” and Ludwig von Mises's explanation of human action.Original article: The Secret Economic Theory Behind the $100,000 Birkin Bag

The iconic Hermès Birkin bag helps illustrate Carl Menger's “Theory of the Good,” and Ludwig von Mises's explanation of human action.Original article: The Secret Economic Theory Behind the $100,000 Birkin Bag

One of the important points made by Carl Menger in his 1871 Principles is that people ordinally rank their preferences, valuing some things more than others. While this seems to be a common-sense principle, it actually has important implications for economic theory.Original article: Why People Pay Higher Prices for Some Goods Relative to Others

One of the important points made by Carl Menger in his 1871 Principles is that people ordinally rank their preferences, valuing some things more than others. While this seems to be a common-sense principle, it actually has important implications for economic theory.Original article: Why People Pay Higher Prices for Some Goods Relative to Others

President of the Mises Institute and author of “How Capitalism Saved America”, Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo joins us to uncover the current state of capitalism and if it still exists in America. Earlier in the episode, Keith discusses the inaccuracy of economic predictions, citing examples like the 2023 recession that never happened, the negative impact of misinformed predictions on investment decisions and business growth.  Persistent housing price crash predictions have been consistently wrong despite global pandemics and higher mortgage rates. Dr. DiLorenzo advocates for #EndTheFed to reduce inflation and restore free market principles. Learn how voluntary exchange between buyer and seller through market prices communicates information and influences production. Resources: Learn more about Austrian economics and Ludwig von Mises through visiting mises.org  Show Notes: GetRichEducation.com/521 For access to properties or free help with a GRE Investment Coach, start here: GREmarketplace.com Get mortgage loans for investment property: RidgeLendingGroup.com or call 855-74-RIDGE  or e-mail: info@RidgeLendingGroup.com Invest with Freedom Family Investments.  You get paid first: Text FAMILY to 66866 For advertising inquiries, visit: GetRichEducation.com/ad Will you please leave a review for the show? I'd be grateful. Search “how to leave an Apple Podcasts review”  GRE Free Investment Coaching: GREmarketplace.com/Coach Best Financial Education: GetRichEducation.com Get our wealth-building newsletter free— text ‘GRE' to 66866 Our YouTube Channel: www.youtube.com/c/GetRichEducation Follow us on Instagram: @getricheducation Complete episode transcript:   Automatically Transcribed With Otter.ai     Keith Weinhold  00:00 Keith, welcome to GRE. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, reviewing some terrible economic predictions and why it matters to you. Then the President of the Mises Institute joins us. Does capitalism still exist in the US and what would happen if we ended the Fed, today on get rich education.   00:24 Since 2014 the powerful get rich education podcast has created more passive income for people than nearly any other show in the world. This show teaches you how to earn strong returns from passive real estate investing in the best markets without losing your time being a flipper or landlord. Show Host Keith Weinhold writes for both Forbes and Rich Dad advisors, who delivers a new show every week since 2014 there's been millions of listener downloads of 188 world nations. He has a list show. Guess who? Top Selling personal finance author Robert Kiyosaki, get rich education can be heard on every podcast platform, plus it has its own dedicated Apple and Android listener phone apps build wealth on the go with the get rich education podcast. Sign up now for the get rich education podcast, or visit getricheducation.com   Corey Coates  01:09 You're listening to the show that has created more financial freedom than nearly any show in the world. This is get rich education.   Keith Weinhold  01:25 welcome to GRE from Syracuse, Sicily to Syracuse, New York, and across 188 nations worldwide, you're listening to one of the longest running and most listened to shows on real estate investing. This is Get Rich Education. I'm your host, Keith Weinhold, now a lot of media companies and pundits and influencers like to make predictions. Listeners like learning about predictions and by engaging just a little of that each of the past few years on one of the last episodes of the year. Here, I forecast the national home price appreciation rate for the following year, many media outlets, pundits and influencers have made terrible, just absolutely terrible, predictions about interest rates and other financial forecasts. Last year, a majority of Pro prognosticators firmly forecast six or eight Fed rate cuts this year, for example, well, we're going to have far fewer, and that's because high inflation kept hanging around. Then there's the 2023 recession that never happened, yet both Bloomberg and the economist actually published some rather ignominious headlines, as it turned out, they published these in the fall of 2022 Bloomberg, big headline was forecast for us, recession within year hits 100% in blow to Biden, well, That was false. That didn't come true. I mean, 100% that doesn't leave you any room for an out. And then also published in the fall of 2022 The Economist ran this headline why a global recession is inevitable in 2023 All right, well, they both believed in a recession, and they believed in it so deeply that it got fossilized. Well, an economic archeologist like me dug it up.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  03:31 We are going to die   Keith Weinhold  03:35 well, but I didn't risk my life like Indiana Jones did there. This archeology, it only involves some Google searches. Well, here's the thing. What's remarkable about America staving off a mammoth recession and leaving all the other g7 nations in the economic dust is the fact that merely predicting a recession often makes it come true. Just predicting one often turns a recession into a self fulfilling prophecy. Yeah, recession forecast headlines alone, they can spook employers from making new hires and slow down manufacturing, and it can also disillusion real estate investors from expanding their portfolios. Well, the US economy grew anyway, besides the farcical prognostications about myriad interest rate cuts in a quote, unquote definite 2023 recession that never happened. You know, there's also a third forecast that so many got wrong. And you probably know what I'm gonna say. I've brought it up before, because this hits our world, those erstwhile and well still ever present housing price crash predictions. I mean this facet of the gloom boom really ramped up from 2020 One until today, even a global pandemic, new wars and a triplicate mortgage rates couldn't stop the housing price surge and the rent surge. A lot of doomsdayers just couldn't see, or they didn't even want to see that a housing shortage would keep prices afloat. They didn't want to see it because they get more clicks when they talk about the gloom government stimulus programs also buoyed prices, and deep homeowner equity cushions will still keep prices afloat. Ever since 2021 here on the show, I've used that rationale and more to explain that home prices would keep appreciating, but that the rate of appreciation would slow down, and it has slowed down since 2021 see YouTubers tick tockers. They notoriously use woe begone housing crash headlines, because that gets more clicks and then some of the rationale behind this. The reasoning is just dreadful, like, what goes up must come down, all right? Well, this is like, why does it matter? Who cares about wrong predictions anyway? What's the point? Well, people become misinformed. People waste their time on these things and see no one loses money on dismal economic predictions. But the damage is done, because when investors don't act well, then they didn't get the gain that they should have had. Businesses didn't get the gain that they should have had when they could have made new investment and hired new employees sooner. And of course, a recession is going to happen sometime. They occur, on average, every five to six years. It is just a normal part of the business cycle will collectively these three faulty economic predictions, rate cuts, a recession and a housing price crash. I think if you bundle them all up combined, it could be as bad as one doomsday prediction about worldwide starvation or the Mayan apocalypse. Remember that the wide to K bug, the acid rain, even that the internet is just a fad that ran a buck 30 years ago. World War Three is eminent, robots overtaking humans, or how about running out of crude oil. I mean, we're definitely all supposed to have jet packs in flying cars by now, right? But yet, did anyone have the clairvoyance to predict the stock market crash of 1929 or September 11 terrorist attacks, or Trump's surprise, 2016 presidency or Bitcoin hitting 70k A while back, or the coronavirus. So really, overall, the bottom line here with predictions is that no one knows the future. Control what you can maintain equanimity, add good properties, gradually raise rent, reduce expenses, create leverage and expect inflation truly the best way to predict the future is to create it in just that way. Well is the USA capitalistic nation today. That's what we'll discuss later with this week's guest. When Chuck Todd hosted the show Meet the Press, he interviewed AOC about this. Yes, I'm talking about us. House Rep from New York, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, what she say? You   08:34 have said you are democratic socialist. Can you be a Democratic socialist and a capitalist? Well, I think it depends on your interpretation. So there are some Democratic socialists that would say, Absolutely not. There are other people that are democratic socialists that would say, I think it's possible. What are you? I think it's possible. I think you say to yourself, I'm a capitalist, but I don't say that. You know, if anything, I would say, I'm I believe in a democratic economy, but.   Keith Weinhold  09:03 okay, well, I'm not sure if that clears it up at all. And I've listened to more of that clip, and it just makes things more confusing. But I think that most people have trouble drawing a line between capitalism and neighboring economic systems. Where exactly do you draw that line? I don't know exactly where to draw it. When I think of capitalism, I think of things though, like removal of interventionist central planning and allowing the free market to run with few guardrails. And then there's an issue like labor unionization. I don't really know about something like that. This is a real estate show. I'm still forming an opinion on a topic like that. In you know, some of this gets political, and that's beyond the scope of get rich education. The Fed was created in 1913 that central planning, its central banking from 1987 to. 2006 Alan Greenspan reigned as Fed chair. Those were his years, and he became even more interventionist. And then his successor, Ben Bernanke, maybe even more so with quantitative easing and such. Let's talk about, should they end the Fed and capitalism with this week's expert guest. You very well may have heard of the late, famed Austrian American economist Ludwig von Mises today, the Mises Institute carries on his legacy, and this week's guest is none other than the President of the Mises Institute. He's also the number one best selling author of how capitalism saved America and his newer book with a title that I love, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Economics. Hey, it's great to have you here. It is. Dr Thomas DiLorenzo.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  11:00 pleased to be with you. Thanks for having me.Th   Keith Weinhold  11:02 Well, Dr DiLorenzo, for those that don't know, just tell us a bit in an overview about Austrian economics and what Ludwig von Mises stood for.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  11:02 Well, Ludwig von Mises was the preeminent critic of socialism and fascism in Europe, and in his day, he fled the Nazis literally hours before the Gestapo broke into his apartment in Geneva, because he was the preeminent critic of fascism and socialism, and he was also Jewish, and so he had to get out of town. And he miraculously ended up after wandering through Europe with his wife in New York City, and he taught at New York University for many years, until he died in 1973 and but the Austrian School of Economics is a school of thought. It has nothing to do with, necessarily, with the Government of Austria, the country of Austria, just this the founder of a man named Carl Menger happened to be from Austria, but probably the most famous or well known among Americans would be Friedrich Hayek, who won the Nobel Prize in 1970s he was a student of Ludwig von Mises and critics of interventionism, critics of socialism. We teach about free markets, of how markets actually work and how governments don't work. And that's in a nutshell, that's what it's about. And you could check out our website, mises.org, M, I, S, E, S.org, you can get a great economic education. We have a lot of free books to download. Some of them are downloaded 30 or 40,000 times a month. Still, it's even Mises old books like human action, first published in the 1960s and so you can get a great education just by reading our website.   Keith Weinhold  12:42 Well, congratulations, that's proof that you're doing an excellent job of carrying on the Mises legacy into the present day, a lot of which is championing capitalism. Do we have capitalism in the United States today?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  12:59 I was an economics professor from 40 years before I got this job as President of the Mises Institute. And I used to say we had islands of socialism in a sea of capitalism at the beginning of my career. But now I'd say it's the opposite, that we have islands of capitalism in a sea of socialism. And socialism, this data is not defined anymore as government ownership. That was, you know, about 100 years ago, the socialism. It's basically government control of industry and in addition to government ownership. So the instruments of the welfare state, the income tax and the regulatory state, is our version of socialism, or central planning, if you will. And it's the Federal Reserve the Fed, which is a government agency that orchestrates the whole thing, really, it's a big, massive central planning industry that controls, regulates basically every aspect of any kind of financial transaction imaginable. They list in their publications over 100 different functions of the Federal Reserve. It's not just monetary policy. It's a big regulatory behemoth, and so that's that's what the Fed is. That's what I think we have today. A friend of mine, Robert Higgs, a well known economic historian, says our system is what he calls participatory fascism. And fascism was a system where private enterprise was permitted, but it was so heavily regulated and regimented by the government that industry had to do what government wanted to do, not what its customers wanted it to do, so much, and a large part of our economic system is just like that, and we get to vote still, so that's where the participatory and comes in, and the pin of Robert Hinz.   Keith Weinhold  14:41 yeah, maybe at best, I can think of today's system as capitalism with guardrails on but the guardrails keep getting taller. And I think of guardrails as being, for example, regulatory agencies like the Fed in FINRA. In the FDA.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  15:01 It is the beginning of my career. You know, I studied economics and a PhD in economics, and there was a big literature on what's called regulatory capture. And it was sort of a big secret among US economic academics. There was all this research going on and how the big regulatory agencies created by the federal government in the late 19th, early 20th centuries, were captured by the industries that they were supposed to be regulating. Right? The theory was they would regulate these industries in the public's best interests. But what has happened from the very beginning is they were captured by the industries, and they benefit the industry at the expense of the public. But today, that's caught on thanks to people like Robert Kennedy Jr, frankly, has been a very popular author. He sold a gazillion copies of his book on Anthony Fauci, and in it, he explains in tremendous detail how the Food and Drug Administration was long ago captured by the pharmaceutical companies. And he's not the only one. I think that that is being more and more recognized by people outside of academic economics, like me, and that's a good thing, and that's sort of the worst example of crony capitalism. It's not real capitalism, but crony capitalism making money through government connections, rather than producing better products, cheaper products and so forth.   Keith Weinhold  16:21 I watched RFK Jr speak in person recently, and I was actually disappointed when he effectively dropped out of the upcoming presidential race. And I do want to talk more with you about the Fed shortly, but with all these regulatory agencies and how I liken them to guard rails. You know, I sort of think of it as a watchdog system that's failing. You mentioned the FDA. I know RFK Jr brought them up an awful lot, the Food and Drug Administration that are supposed to help regulate what we put inside our own bodies in our diet. But these systems are failing. We have regulatory agencies in industry, industry in regulatory agencies. I mean, look at the obesity rate. Look at all the ultra processed food that's allowed. Look at all the seed oils that are allowed in food that people actually think are healthy for them. So this system of capitalism with guardrails is failing almost everywhere you look.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  16:22 I wouldn't call it capitalism. I wouldn't use the word capitalism at all, other than crony capitalism, people can relate to that. You know, a lot of these regulatory agencies were lobbied for in the first place by industry. That while the very first one was the Interstate Commerce Commission, it was in the 1880s it was meant to regulate the railroad companies. The first president was the president of a Railroad Corporation, the head of the Interstate Commerce Commission. So talk about the fox guarding the hen house. That was from the very beginning. And so in a sense, this word capture theory of regulation, which Kennedy has used, they weren't really captured. They always were created by the government. The same is true of all the so called Public Utilities. It was the corporations, the electric power companies, the water supply companies, that lobbied for governments to give them a monopoly, a legal monopoly, in electricity, water supply and all these things that were called natural monopolies, but there was nothing natural about them. There was vigorous competition in the early 20th century in telephone, electricity, water supply, and that was all set aside by government regulation, creating monopolies. For example, in electric power, there's an economist named Walter primo who wrote a book some years ago showing that always have been several dozen cities in America that never went this way, that always allowed direct competition between electric power companies. And what do you know, better service and lower prices. As a result, they did dozens of statistical studies to demonstrate this in his book.   Keith Weinhold  18:58 Okay, well, that's a great case study. Why don't we talk about what things would look like if we took down one of these agencies? We're a real estate investing in finance show. Sometimes it's a popular meme or hashtag to say, end the Fed. What would it look like if we ended the Fed?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  19:18 Well, the Fed was created in 1913 in the same era, with all these other regulatory captured agencies were created, right? And it was created basically to cartelize and create a cartel for the banking industry to make it almost impossible to go bankrupt. They've been bailing out foolish bankers for 111 years. And of course, the biggest example was that as the crash of 08 after they they handed Goldman Sachs and other big investment banks billions of dollars. That was a direct assault on capitalism itself, because capitalism, as you know, is a profit and loss system. It's not a I keep the profits. You pay for my losses system. You're the taxpayer. But that's what happened with that. So the Fed would. Fall into that the Fed is actually the fourth central bank in America. We had three other ones. First one was called Bank of North America. Its currency was so unreliable, nobody trusted it went out of business in a year and a half. And then we created something called the Bank of the United States in 1791 same thing. It created boom and bust cycles, high unemployment, price inflation, corrupted politics. It was defunded after 20 years, and then it was brought back to fund the debt from the war of 1812 and so we had a Second Bank of the United States. It did the same thing, boom and bust cycles, price inflation, corrupted politics. Benefited special interest, but not the general interest, and President Andrew Jackson defunded it, and so we went without a central bank from roughly 1840 until 1913 so we've had experience of that. And what we had been was competing currencies, and that would be sort of a stepping stone. If we got rid of the fed, we wouldn't have to abolish the Fed altogether. We could amend the charter to the Fed to say you're no longer permitted to buy bonds. Can't buy government bonds anymore. That's how they inflate the money supply, right? By buying bonds. That's totally unnecessary. And we could just just that would be a great step forward, and we would sort of whittle away our $80 trillion debt, if you count again upon count the unfunded liabilities of the federal government,   Keith Weinhold  21:26 if we did end the Fed, what would the price of money? Which are interest rates really look like? Would a new market rate be sent by individuals and companies on the free market like Bank of America, with a customer or borrower settling on an interest rate that they both agree to.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  21:44 You know, the Fed uses sort of Soviet style economics, price control. The economists and are all getting all over Kamala Harris for recommendations for price controls on rent and other things. Well, the Fed price control. They control the price of money. That's what they do. And so there's a big, kind of a comical thing that here you have all these economists, if they were to teach economics in the week one, they would teach about the bad effects of price controls, and then they get a job at the Fed, and they spend their whole career enforcing price controls on money, and the interest rate would be determined by supply and demand for credit and inflationary expectations. That's what the market does. And you wouldn't have these bureaucrats at the Fed tinkering around with interest rates, creating tremendous arbitrage opportunities for Wall Street investors. With all the movements and interest rates, you'd have much more stable interest rates, and and you wouldn't have this ridiculous system where the Fed says we need to always have forever at least 2% inflation. And of course, they never meet that, and they lie about it. I don't believe for one minute that the price inflation right now is 3% or under 3% that's ridiculous, right? And so things should be getting cheaper. Everything should be getting cheaper because of all the technology we have. My first PC I bought in the early 80s for $4,000 and it was a piece of prehistoric junk compared to my cell phone today, that almost for free. Almost everything should be like that agriculture, but the reason it isn't is the Fed keeps pumping so much money in circulation, that it pumps up the demand for goods and services, and that's what creates price inflation. And by its own admission, that's what it does, even though it's charter, it's original charter said they're supposed to fight inflation. All of a sudden, about 10 years ago or so, they announced, south of blue, we always have to have at least 2% inflation. Congress had nothing to do with that. President had nothing to do with that, and the people of America had nothing to do with that. It was dictators like Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke that just make these announcements. And where does that come from when we live under the dictatorship of the Fed? And of course, the people who are hurt the most by the Fed are elderly people are living on relatively fixed incomes and are forced to become Wall Street speculators they want to make any more money other than their fixed income, where, you know, during the days of Greenspan, when they're pursuing zero interest rates, maybe the mortgage industry like that, but the people on retirement income were starving as a result of that. So it's been sort of an economic war on the retired population.   Keith Weinhold  24:24 Things should get faster and cheaper to produce, like you said. However, there's definitely one thing that's not getting faster to produce, that's housing build times. Housing build times have actually gone up, which is sort of another discussion unto itself. But we talk about the Fed and then setting prices. People wouldn't stand for setting the price or having price controls on oil or lumber or bananas, but yet we set the price of money itself. People have just become accustomed to that. Yet it's that money itself that we use to buy oil and lumber and bananas the fed with that dual mandate of stable prices and maximum employment. If we did abolish the Fed, what would happen to the rate of inflation?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  25:12 Well, we would have less inflation. It's supposed to what we replace it with. There's some system would be a replacement, but we wouldn't have the boom and bust cycles that we have now. There's been research in the past 100 years or so of the Fed, and what the academic researchers have concluded is that the Fed has made the economy in general more unstable than it was before we had the Fed and price inflation. That's a joke. The dollar is worth maybe three cents of what it was in the year 1913 right when the Fed was created. So it has failed on all accounts. And so if we got rid of it, we would reverse that. The idea would be to start out with a competing money system. And I'll tell you a quick story is, you know the word Dixie from the south, you know land of Dixie that was named after a currency by a New Orleans bank called the Dix D, I x 10 in French, and it was 100% gold reserve. It was backed by something real and valuable, and it was so popular as even used in Minnesota. But that's why the whole south, the states in the South, were using this currency, because it was so reliable. But during the Civil War, the national currency acts imposed taxes on the competing currencies and taxed them out of business and established the greenback dollar, as it was called, as the Monopoly money of the country. We didn't get a central bank during the Civil War, but we got that. And so that's the kind of system that we would have. Friedrich Hayek wrote a whole book about this, about competing currencies, called the denationalization of money. He poses that as a good stepping stone to a freer market in money. And like you said, Money is the most important thing. Is most more important than bananas or shoes or any of these other things that we might have price controls on.   Keith Weinhold  27:01 All right, so we're talking about the case for ending the Fed. What is the counter argument? I mean, other than the government wanting control, is there a valid, or any academic counter argument for keeping the Fed in place?   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  27:16 The Fed has an army. I call it the Fed's Praetorian Guard of academics. There was a research article published by an economist named Larry White at George Mason University several years ago, and he found that 75% of all the articles in the academic journals regarding money, monetary policy and so forth, are by people who are basically paid by the Fed, one way or the other. Either they're fed economists, or they've been invited to a conference by the Fed, or they're an intern some relationship with the Fed. The late Milton Friedman once said, If you want a career as a monetary economist, it's not a good idea to criticize the biggest employer in your field. So there's a lot of nonsense about that. And so yes, you'll have all sorts of rationales, but it basically comes down to this, that we think we can do central planning better than the Russians did under communism, because the Fed is basically an economic central planning agency, and there's no reason to believe Americans are better at it than the Russians or anybody else. And it basically comes down to that, you know, studying the past 111 years that's showing Well, yeah, they've been trying that for 111 years. They've made the economy more unstable, and they have failed miserably to control inflation. And why should we give them another chance? Why should we continue along this road? We shouldn't So, yeah, there'll be all kind of excuses the late Murray Rothbard, who was one of the founders of the Mises, who once answered this question by saying, It's as though people said, Well, say the government always made shoes. 100 years ago they took over the shoe industry. People would be saying, who will make shoes if the government doesn't make shoes? The government has always made shoes, right? But the government has not always monopolized the money supply. It's only like I said, we abolished three Feds in our history. In American history, they weren't called the Fed, but they were central banks. And the Fed is called a central bank, and we've done that three times. We've abolished more central banks than we have kept in American history.   Keith Weinhold  29:17  We're talking with Dr Thomas D Lorenzo. He is the president of the Mises Institute. About, is there really any capitalism left more when we come back, this is Get Rich Education. I'm your host. Keith Weinhold,  hey, you can get your mortgage loans at the same place where I get mine, at Ridge lending group and MLS 42056, they provided our listeners with more loans than any provider in the entire nation, because they specialize in income properties, they help you build a long term plan for growing your real estate empire with leverage. You can start your pre qualification and chat with President Caeli Ridge personally. Start now while it's on your mind at RidgeLendingGroup.com, that's Ridgelendinggroup.com. Your bank is getting rich off of you. The national average bank account pays less than 1% on your savings. If your money isn't making 4% you're losing your hard earned cash to inflation. Let the liquidity fund help you put your money to work with minimum risk, your cash generates up to an 8% return with compound interest year in and year out. Instead of earning less than 1% sitting in your bank account, the minimum investment is just 25k you keep getting paid until you decide you want your money back. Their decade plus track record proves they've always paid their investors 100% in full and on time. And I would know, because I'm an investor too. Earn 8% hundreds of others are text family to 66866, learn more about freedom. Family investments, liquidity fund on your journey to financial freedom through passive income. Text, family to 66866.   Kristen Tate  31:11 This is author Kristen Tate. Listen to Get Rich Education with Keith Weinhold, and Don't quit Your Daydream.   Keith Weinhold  31:27 welcome back to get rich education. We're talking with Dr Thomas DiLorenzo. He is the president of the Mises Institute. You can learn more about them @mises.org and Dr DiLorenzo. Frederick Hayek, an economist that you mentioned very well known and a student of Ludwig von Mises, he believed that prices are a communication mechanism between a buyer and a seller. Say, for example, there's a new style of single family rental home that everyone wants to rent. So therefore the rent price goes up when other builders see that the rent price goes up, that brings in more builder competition, and with more competition, that brings rent prices down, and then the world is filled with abundant housing, rather than a scarcity of housing. So that's how I think of a free market system within capitalism as working, as defined through Hayek.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  32:22 You know, the consumer is king. Von Mises once wrote about the same point where he said that people mistakenly believe that it's the bankers and the CEOs and the businesses that control what gets produced and so forth, but it's really the consumer. You build a housing development then people don't want those houses. You'll find out real fast who's in charge. It's not the mortgage brokers. It's not the bankers. It's not you, it's the consumer. That's the free market system, and if you do without it, and not using the free market system, whether it's for money or anything else, is kind of like trying to find your way around a strange city with no street signs, and the prices are the street signs that tell us what to do, exactly like you said, if there's strong demand for a certain type of housing, that'll drive the price up, and that'll tell the home builders, we can make money building more of these. And they will do that. Nobody tells them. The Chairman of the Fed doesn't have to tell them that the President doesn't have to tell them that Congress doesn't have to issue a declaration telling them to do that. That was the Soviet Union where they tried that. And that's the great thing about the market, is that the consumer can tell the richest man in the world like Elon Musk, go play in the traffic. Elon Musk, if they don't like his cars or whatever he's producing, even though he's the richest man in the world. And he understands that he's a pretty successful businessman, I would say, and so so he understands that the consumer is his boss.   Keith Weinhold  33:53 Well, what else do we need to know? You have published a lot of celebrated books, from how capitalism saved America to the politically incorrect guide to economics. What else might a real estate investor or an economic enthusiast need to know today? Oh,   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  34:10 well, I think everybody needs to be their own economist. You can listen to the talking heads on TV and on podcasts and all that, but educate yourself and become your own economist. Because a lot of the people on TV, as you might see on the news, they have an ax to grind, or they have a sort of a hidden financial interest beyond what they're saying, Be your own economist. And that's why I'm selling my website, which is everything on it, it's for free, mises.org, and there are quite a few others too. You don't have to go to school, you don't have to get a degree. You can get a good economic education, for example, on money. We're in the middle of giving away 100,000 copies of a book called What has government done to our money. I'm Murray rothbar. You go to our website, scroll down to the bottom, and you can fill out a form online, and we'll send you free books and. You can educate yourself that way. And so just in general, I think that's what people need to do. I taught MBA students for many years who are people in their 30s or maybe even early 40s, who didn't have economics degrees, but they were really into it, and for the first time in their careers, they decided maybe I should understand how the economic world that I live in and work in every day operates rather than going through your life and your career without you. Might know all about real estate sales, but it's also useful to know about the economy in general and how things work.   Keith Weinhold  35:35 And when one becomes their own economic student and they take that on, I think it's important for them, like you touched on to not just consume the economic news that's on CNBC or other major media, because that doesn't really tell you how to create wealth. It might inform you, but it doesn't necessarily tell you how to take action. For example, on this show an educational channel, you might learn about a story about rising inflation like we had starting three or four years ago. And here we talk about how, okay, if inflation is going to be a long term economic force, you may or may not like what the Fed is doing, but rather than save money, borrow money, outsource that debt service to the tenant on a cash flowing asset like a single family home or an apartment building. And that inflation that you're learning about on CNBC will actually benefit you and debase your debt with prudent leverage on a property, for example, so not just consuming the news, but learning and educating yourself and acting.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  36:34 Oh, sure, well It just so happens that last night, I was talking to a friend of mine who's a real estate professional. They're all talking about, Oh, are we going to have a slight drop in interest rates? And I reminded them that there will be a part of the market if they see it, if we do have a slight drop in interest rates, we'll look at that and say, well, maybe this is a new trend. And so I'll sit back and I'll wait. I'm not going to buy now, because I think the interest rates are going to go down even further in the next six months there were, there would be some segment of the market that thinks that way. And so that's just one little thing. Another thing I would mention is that one of the basic tenets of free market economics is that voluntary trade is mutually beneficial. People buy and sell from each other, because both sides benefit. And that's very important for any business person to keep in mind as you structure business deals, because you know about business deal that is successful is basically, I will give you what you want, and you give me what I want, and we're both happy. And that's that's one of the main tenets of how the market works. Voluntary exchange is mutually beneficial. So think about how to make it mutually beneficial, and you'll succeed in making a deal.   Keith Weinhold  37:45 Well, it's been an excellent discussion on Is there any capitalism left, and how would it look like if we turned the course and created more capitalism here in the United States? It's been great having you on the show.   Dr Thomas DiLorenzo  37:58 Thank you.   Keith Weinhold  38:05 Yeah , again, Learn more @mises.org or look up books by Dr Thomas DiLorenzo. His viewpoint is that there are now merely islands of capitalism in a sea of socialism where those conditions were inverted last century. We've got to end the complex between the government and corporations that these watchdogs are basically powerless when the fox is guarding the henhouse. Dr dilorezzo says we could change the Fed charter so that they couldn't buy bonds, which should reduce inflation. So he does offer a way forward there, a solution.  In capitalism, he consumer is king. This is a good thing. You yourself are empowered because you get to vote with your dollars. So therefore what you buy more of society will see and make more of but a prosperous, progressive economy that should be able to produce goods and services that are constantly cheaper because they get more and more efficient to make with innovation, but centrally planned inflation makes them more expensive, at least in dollar denominated terms. So progress should make things cheaper? Well, then everything should take fewer dollars to buy, homes, oil, bananas, grapes, but it doesn't, and it won't anytime soon, like I mentioned in the interview, there single family build times are taking even longer. That's not more efficient, and they're sure not getting cheaper. In fact, the National Association of Home Builders tells us that from permit to completion in 2015 it took 7.2 months to build a single family home. By 2019 it was up to 8.1 months and then. Last year, the time required to build a single family home from permit to completion was 10.1 months. That's not the side of an efficient economy. So basically, therefore, in the last eight, nine years, the time to build a home has gone from 7.2 months up to 10.1 months. That is a drastic increase in a short period of time. Just amazing. And we now have data after covid as well, broken down by region. The longest build time, by the way, is in New England, where it is 13.9 months to build a home from permit to completion. Gosh, such inefficiency. But despite all that stuff that you might find discouraging like that, I want to go out on a good news note here some encouraging sentiment for you, if you champion free markets, then invest in us rental property down the road, there is no centrally controlled ceiling on what you can sell your property for. Most places don't have rent control. In fact, there's been no federal rent control on private property since World War Two. And somewhat ironically, you benefit. You actually benefit from government backed loans at these low fixed rates, and now they're moderate fixed rates. You often get these through Fannie Freddie or the FHA. See you benefit from that particular government backing as a savvy borrower for rental property. And on top of this, you use the GRE inflation triple crown to flip over that not so capitalistic inflationary force. You flip it upside down and use it to your benefit, profiting fantastically from inflation. So you know how to take the situation you're given and use it to your advantage rather than your detriment. Big thanks to Dr Thomas DiLorenzo today, longtime econ professor and current Mises Institute president, more ways to build Real Estate Wealth coming up here for you on the show in future weeks, as always, with the dash of economics and wealth mindset. Until then, I'm your host. Keith Weinhold, Don't Quit Your Daydream.   42:28 Nothing on this show should be considered specific, personal or professional advice. Please consult an appropriate tax, legal, real estate, financial or business professional for individualized advice. Opinions of guests are their own. Information is not guaranteed. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. The host is operating on behalf of get rich Education LLC, exclusively,   Keith Weinhold  42:56 The preceding program was brought to you by your home for wealth, building, getricheducation.com.  

Bob goes solo to explain the contributions of Carl Menger and Ludwig von Mises to monetary theory. He then deals with the critique of David Graeber, who argues that the economists' story of the origin of money is bogus.Bob's Article, "Origin of the Specie": Mises.org/HAP464aR. A. Radford, "The Economic Organisation of a P.O.W": Mises.org/HAP464bBob's Book, Understanding Money Mechanics: Mises.org/HAP464cGet your ticket to Living Free in an Unfree World in Albuquerque, New Mexico: Mises.org/NM24

Bob goes solo to explain the contributions of Carl Menger and Ludwig von Mises to monetary theory. He then deals with the critique of David Graeber, who argues that the economists' story of the origin of money is bogus.Bob's Article, "Origin of the Specie": Mises.org/HAP464aR. A. Radford, "The Economic Organisation of a P.O.W": Mises.org/HAP464bBob's Book, Understanding Money Mechanics: Mises.org/HAP464cGet your ticket to Living Free in an Unfree World in Albuquerque, New Mexico: Mises.org/NM24

María Blanco González es una académica y economista española, especializada en Historia del Pensamiento Económico, Historia Económica, Teoría económica, Historia de los modelos empresariales y Políticas públicas. Obtuvo su doctorado en Economía por la Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Es profesora en la Universidad CEU-San Pablo desde 1996. También fue profesora del Máster en Economía de la Escuela Austriaca en la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos durante casi 7 años.En esta apasionante charla debatimos diversos temas clave de economía e inversión desde la perspectiva de la Escuela Austriaca: procesos dinámicos evolutivos frente a enfoques estáticos, la importancia de los precios como fuente de información, el papel clave del tiempo en las decisiones empresariales y los efectos de las políticas monetarias expansivas. También analizamos la teoría del capital, la subjetividad del valor, y cómo los sesgos humanos y la incertidumbre influyen en la economía y las inversiones.Apoya este podcast visitando a los patrocinadores:Interactive Brokers: Un broker con acceso a mercados de todo el mundo.Indexa Capital: Ahorra comisiones dándote de alta con mi código.EVO Cuenta Inteligente Indice de temas comentados0:00:00 Teaser0:01:01 Descubrimiento de la Escuela Austriaca de Economía0:02:41 Tesis doctoral0:06:33 Cómo Paramés descubre a la escuela austriaca0:16:21 Carl Menger, el fundador de la escuela0:21:26 Enfoque evolucionista0:22:18 La revolución marginalista de Menger, Jevons y Walras0:23:14 El mercado como un proceso dinámico0:23:20 Controles de precios0:23:28 Precios como información0:37:27 Incertidumbre y tiempo0:39:33 El desastre de los controles de precios0:42:48 Teoría del capital0:48:56 Sesgos humanos basados en la evolución0:57:07 Visión de la familia extendida en China1:01:13 Enfoque mecanicista en economía versus enfoque biológico1:03:00 Keynes y sus inversiones en Bolsa1:06:32 La importancia del error1:07:10 Incentivos1:10:14 La necesidad de control1:12:19 Teoría subjetiva del valor1:14:33 Precios como fuente clave de información1:15:42 Los peligros de agregar1:17:08 Israel Kirzner: el empresario perfecto está alerta a las oportunidades sin explotar1:19:30 Factor X de Javier G. Recuenco1:21:16 Proceso descubrimiento de los precios1:28:09 Bancos Centrales y decisiones por comité1:30:03 Efectos de las políticas monetarias expansivas1:38:47 Del patrón oro al dinero fiat1:48:00 Dinero como institución evolutiva (Menger)1:56:19 Aceleración en la evolución2:02:13 Bitcoin y CBDCs2:02:56 Nuevas aportaciones de la Escuela austriacaMás info con enlaces a los libros y contenidos comentados en:https://www.rankia.com/blog/such/6449487-91-escuela-austriaca-economia-inversion-maria-blanco

What better way to explain the relationship between higher-order and lower-order goods than with food? Here, we look at the falafel sandwich.Original Article: What Can Carl Menger Teach Us about Falafel Sandwiches?

What better way to explain the relationship between higher-order and lower-order goods than with food? Here, we look at the falafel sandwich.Original Article: What Can Carl Menger Teach Us about Falafel Sandwiches?

Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture. Sponsored by Shone and Brae Sadler.Recorded at the Austrian Economics Research Conference, 22 March 2024, in Auburn, Alabama. Includes an introduction by Joseph T. Salerno.Lecture Text: Thank you, Joseph, for your kind introduction and thank you, Shone and Brae Sadler, for your generous sponsorship in making this event possible. It is a pleasure and personal honor to be invited to deliver this Henry Hazlitt Memorial Lecture titled “Ayn Rand and the Austrian Economists” at the Mises Institute's Austrian Economics Research Conference.Henry Hazlitt is one of my favorite writers on economics and ethics. His thoughtful, incisive, and influential writings are marked by his clarity of style and logical analysis. Both Henry Hazlitt and Ayn Rand could really write. Hazlitt's non-fiction books, Economics in One Lesson and Foundations of Morality, along with his novel, Time Will Run Back, complement Ayn Rand's ideas in her books such as The Virtue of Selfishness, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, and Atlas Shrugged. In their philosophical, political, and economic views, Hazlitt and Rand largely agree, as they make the same points in different ways with respect to the virtue of the free market as the path to prosperity and happiness. Also, they were friends in their personal lives. In addition, Henry Hazlitt and I had a great friend in common in the late, well-respected and greatly-loved Austrian economist, Bill Peterson.I am excited to be here to give this talk on Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, and Murray Rothbard and how their ideas may be complementary to the essential ideas of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. Perhaps I will be able to provide some new insights to you. We'll see!Like my recently deceased friend, Sam Bostaph, I have great admiration for the ideas of Carl Menger. I will begin by discussing some of Menger's key ideas and comparing them with those of Ayn Rand. I will then repeat this process with the fundamental ideas of Mises and Rothbard. I will conclude with an overall assessment with respect to the potential compatibility of Austrian economics and Objectivism.Carl Menger (1840-1921) began the modern period of economic thought and provided the foundation for the Austrian School of Economics in his two books, Principles of Economics (1871) and Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences with Special Reference to Economics (1883). In these books Menger destroyed the existing structure of economic science, including its theory and methodology, and put it on totally new foundations.Menger was a realist who said that we could know the world through both common sense and scientific method. Menger was committed to finding exact laws of economics based on the direct analysis of concrete phenomena that can be observed and characterized with precision. He sought to find the necessary characteristics of economic phenomena and their relationships. He also heralded the advantages of verbal language over mathematical language in that the former can express the essences of economic phenomena, which is something that mathematical language cannot do.Menger viewed exchange as the embodiment of the essential desire and search to satisfy individual human needs. It follows that the intersection between human needs and the availability of goods capable of satisfying those needs is at the root of economic activity. Emphasizing human uncertainty, error, and the time-consuming nature of economic processes, Menger was concerned with the information content of economic choices and the process of acquiring information in order to increase the well-being of economic actors.As this talk will demonstrate, Carl Menger's writings are the closest to Randian doctrines that have ever emanated from any economist. It will follow that we should read and reread his great books and share them with our friends and students.Aristotelian philosophy was at the root of Menger's framework. His biologistic language goes well with his Aristotelian foundations in his philosophy of science and economics. Menger illustrated how Aristotelian induction could be used in economics and he based his epistemology on Aristotelian induction. Menger's Aristotelian inclinations can be observed in his desire to uncover the essence of economic phenomena. He viewed the constituent elements of economic phenomena as immanently ordered and emphasized the primacy of exactitude and universality as preferable epistemological characteristics of theory.Menger's desire was to uncover the real nature or essence of economic phenomena. As an immanent realist, he was interested in essences and laws as manifested in the world. His general and abstract economic theory attempted to unify all true fragments of economic knowledge.Holding that causality underpins economic laws, Menger taught that theoretical science provides the tools for studying phenomena that exhibit regularities. He distinguished between exact types and laws that deal with strictly typical phenomena and empirical-realistic types and laws that deal with truth within a particular spatio-temporal domain. Empirical laws are found by observation and exact laws are found by conceptualization. Menger's exact approach involves deductive-universalistic theory that looks for regularities in the coexistence and succession of phenomena that admits no exceptions and that are strictly ordered. His theoretical economics is concerned with exact laws based on the assumptions of self-interest, full-knowledge, and freedom. Menger's exact theoretical approach involves both isolation and abstraction from disturbing factors.Menger developed a number of fundamental Austrian doctrines such as the causal-genetic approach, methodological individualism, and the connection between time and error. He incorporated purposeful action, uncertainty, the occurrence of errors, the information acquisition process, learning, and time into his economic analysis. As an Aristotelian essentialist and immanent realist, he considered a priori essences as existing in reality. His goal was to discover invariant principles or laws governing economic phenomena and to elaborate exact universal laws. To find strictly ordered exact laws he said that we had to omit principles of individuation such as time and space. This entails isolation of the economic aspect of phenomena and abstraction from disturbing factors such as error, ignorance, and external compulsion. Menger thus argued for an exact orientation of theoretical research whose validity is totally independent of any empirical tests.Both Aristotle and Menger viewed essences, universals, or concepts as metaphysical and had no compelling explanations of the method to be employed in order to abstract the essence from the particulars in which it is indivisibly wedded. For Rand, essences are epistemological and contextual, rather than metaphysical. For her, concepts are the products of a cognitive method whose processes are performed by a human being but whose content is determined by reality.Menger's theory of needs and wants is the link between the natural sciences (particularly biology) and the human sciences. He established this link by describing the final cause of human economic enterprise as an aspect of human nature biologically understood. He analyzed economic activity based on a theory of human action. His theory emphasized individual perception, valuation, deliberation, choice, and action.The foundation of Menger's value theory is a theory of human action that involves a theory of knowledge. He believed that men can understand the workings of the economy. Menger's goal was to establish economic theory on a solid foundation by grounding it on a sound value theory. To do this, he consistently incorporated his methodological individualism into his theory of value.Menger understood that values can be subjective (i.e., personally estimated), but that men should rationally seek objective life-affirming values. He explained that real wants correspond with the objective state of affairs. Menger distinguished between real and imaginary wants and goods depending upon whether or not a person correctly understands a good's objective ability to satisfy a want. Individuals can be wrong about their judgment of value. Menger's emphasis on objective values is consistent with philosophical realism and with a correspondence theory of truth.Menger does trace market exchange back to a man's personal valuations of various economic goods and observes that scales of value are variable from person to person and are subject to change over time. There are certainly “subjectivist” features in Menger's economic analysis that are founded on his methodological individualism which implies that people differ and have a variety of goals, purposes, and tastes. Personal evaluation is therefore inherent in a principled and consistent understanding of methodological individualism.As a supreme advocate of individualist methodology, Menger recognized the primacy of active individual agents who generate all of the phenomena of the social sciences. His methodological individualism is a doctrine that reflects the real structure of society and economy and the centrality of the human agent.Menger's theory of value essentially states that life is the ultimate standard of value. According to Menger, human life is a process in which a person, given his needs and the command of the means to satisfy them, is himself the specific point where human economic life both originates and ends. Menger thus introduced life, value, individual preferences that motivate people, and individual choices into economics. He thus essentially agreed on the same standard of life as the much later Ayn Rand. Value is a contextual judgment made by economizing men. Value is related to the existential state of the individual and the ability of the good in question to change that state in a manner desired by the person.Although Menger speaks of economic value while Rand is concerned with moral value, their ideas are much the same. Both view human life as the ultimate value. The difference is that Menger was concerned with economic values that satisfy a man's needs for food, shelter, healthcare, wealth, production, and so forth. From Rand's perspective, every human value (including economic value) is potentially a moral value that may be important to the ethical standard of a man's life qua man. Their shared biocentric concept of value holds that objective values support a man's life and originate in a relationship between a man and his survival requirements.Both Rand and Menger espouse a kind of contextually-relational objectivism in their theories of value. Value is seen as a relational quality dependent on the subject, the object, and the context or situation involved.Not many Objectivists, or others for that matter, know much about Menger's Austrian Aristotelianism and his commonsense and scientific realism. This is unfortunate. His writings have the potential to provide essential building blocks for a realist construction of economics. Ultimately, they may provide the vehicle for the harmonization and integration of Austrian economics with Objectivism.As we know, the preeminent theory within Austrian economics is the Misesian subjectivist school. Mises maintained that it is by means of its subjectivism that praxeological economics develops into objective science. The praxeologist takes individual values as given and assumes that individuals have different motivations and prefer different things. The same economic phenomena mean different things to different people. In fact, buying and selling take place because people value things differently. The importance of goods is derived from the importance of the values they are intended to achieve. When a person values an object, this simply means that he imputes enough importance to it to be willing to start a chain of causation to change or maintain it, thus making it a thing of value. Misesian economics does not study what is in an object, as does the natural scientist, but rather, studies what is in the subject.Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973), the Austrian philosophical economist, is one of our most passionate, consistent, and intransigent defenders of capitalism. Mises defends the free society and private ownership on the grounds that they are desirable from the perspective of human happiness, freedom, peace, and productivity. He constructed a monumental, overarching, systematic, and comprehensive conceptual framework that elucidated the timeless, immutable laws that guide human behavior. Mises integrated his profound theories of methodology, economics, political science, history, and the social sciences in his 1949 magnum opus, Human Action.There is an important dissemblance within Austrian value theory between Menger and Mises. However, it is possible for Menger's more objective-value-oriented theory to coexist and complement Mises's pure subjectivism which is based on the inscrutability of individual values and preferences. Although Menger agrees with Mises that an individual's chosen values are personal and, therefore subjective and unknowable to the economist, he also contended that a person ought to be rationally pursuing his objective life-affirming values. Menger thus can be viewed as a key link-pin figure between Misesian praxeology and Objectivist ethics.According to Mises, economics is a value-free science of means, rather than of ends, that describes but does not prescribe. However, although the world of praxeological economics, as a science, may be value-free the human world is not value-free. Economics is the science of human action and human actions are inextricably connected with values and ethics. It follows that praxeological economics needs to be situated within the context of a normative framework. Praxeological economics does not conflict with a normative perspective on human life. Economics needs to be connected with a discipline that is concerned with ends such as the end of human flourishing. Praxeological economics can stay value-free if it is recognized that it is morally proper for people to take part in market and other voluntary transactions. Such a value-free science must be combined with an appropriate end.Economics, for Mises, is a value-free tool for objective and critical appraisal. Economic science differentiates between the objective, interpersonally valid conclusions of economic praxeology and the personal value judgments of the economist. Critical appraisal can be objective, value-free, and untainted by bias. It is important for economic science to be value-free and not to be distorted by the value judgments or personal preferences of the economist. The credibility of economic science depends upon an impartial and dispassionate concern for truth. Value-freedom is a methodological device designed to separate and isolate an economist's scientific work from the personal preferences of the given economic researcher. His goal is to maintain neutrality and objectivity with respect to the subjective values of others.Misesian economics focuses on the descriptive aspects of human action by offering reasoning about means and ends. The province of praxeological economics is the logical analysis of the success or failure of selected means to attain chosen ends. Means only have value because, and to the degree that, their ends are valued.The reasons why an individual values what he values and the determination of whether or not his choices and actions are morally good or bad are certainly significant concerns but they are not in the realm of the praxeological economist. The content of moral or ultimate ends is not the domain of the economist qua economist. There is another level of values that value in terms of right preferences. This more objectivist sphere of value defines value in terms of what an individual ought to value.Mises grounds economics upon the action axiom which is the fundamental and universal truth that individual men exist and act by making purposive choices among alternatives. Upon this axiom, Mises deduces the entire systematic structure of economic theory. Mises's advocacy of free markets and his opposition to statism stem from his analysis of the nature and consequences of freely acting individuals compared to the nature of government and the consequences brought about by government intervention.For Mises, economic behavior is a special case of human action. He contends that it is through the analysis of the idea of action that the principles of economics can be deduced. Economic theorems are seen as connected to the foundation of real human purposes. Economics is based on true and evident axioms, arrived at by introspection into the essence of human action. From these axioms, Mises derives the logical implications or truths of economics.Through the use of abstract economic theorizing, Mises recognizes the nature and operation of human purposefulness and entrepreneurial resourcefulness and identifies the systematic tendencies which influence the market process. Mises's insight was that economic reasoning has its basis in the understanding of the action axiom. He says that sound deductions from a priori axioms are apodictically true and cannot be empirically tested. Mises developed, through deductive reasoning, the chains of economic theory based on introspective understanding of what it means to be a rational, purposeful, and acting human being. The method of economics is deductive and its starting point is the concept of action.According to Mises, all of the categories, theorems, or laws of economics are implied in the action axiom. These include, but are not limited to: subjective value, causality, ends, means, preference, cost, profit and loss, opportunities, scarcity, marginal utility, marginal costs, opportunity cost, time preference, originary interest, association, and so on.As an adherent of Kantian epistemology, Mises states that the concept of action is a priori to all experience. Thinking is a mental action. For Mises, a priori means independent of any particular time or place. Denying the possibility of arriving at laws via induction, Mises argues that evidence for the a priori is based on reflective universal inner experience.However, Misesian praxeology could operate within a Randian philosophical structure. The concept of action could be formally and inductively derived from perceptual data. Actions would be seen as performed by entities who act in accordance with their nature. Man's distinctive mode of action involves rationality and free will. Men are thus rational beings with free wills who have the ability to form their own purposes and aims. Human action also assumes an uncoerced human will and limited knowledge. All of the above can be seen as consistent with Misesian praxeology. Once we arrive at the concept of human action, Mises's deductive logical derivations can come into play.Knowledge gained from praxeological economics is both value-free (i.e., value-neutral) and value relevant. Value-free knowledge supplied by economic science is value-relevant when it supplies information for rational discussions, deliberations, and determinations of the morally good. Economics is reconnected with philosophy, especially the branches of metaphysics and ethics, when the discussion is shifted to another sphere. It is fair to say that economic science exists because men have concluded that the objective knowledge provided by praxeological economics is valuable for the pursuit of both a person's subjective and ultimate ends.Advocating the idea of “man's survival qua man” or of a good or flourishing life involves value judgments. To make value judgments, one must accept the existence of a comprehensive natural order and the existence of fundamental absolute principles in the universe. This acceptance in no way conflicts with the Misesian concept of subjective economic value. Natural laws ae discovered, are not arbitrary relationships, but instead are relationships that are already true. A man's human nature, including his attributes of individuality, reason, and free will, is the ultimate source of moral reasoning. Value is meaningless outside the context of man.Praxeological economics and the philosophy of human flourishing are complementary and compatible disciplines. Economics teaches us that social cooperation through the private property system and division of labor enables most individuals to prosper and to pursue their flourishing and happiness. In turn, the worldview of human flourishing informs men how to act. In making their life-affirming ethical and value-based judgments, men can refer to and employ the data of economic science.Mises and Rand were passionate critics of collectivism. Whereas Mises criticized the economic and political functioning of collectivism, Rand attacked the morality of collectivism. They agree that collectivism in the form of people, races, or nations does not exist independently from the individuals who comprise them. In addition, they both dismissed positivism's rejection of the human mind as real and as the tool of knowledge about the world, man, and his actions. They also believed that free-market capitalism is the best possible arrangement for society. Their promotion of rationality, free choice, and subjective (i.e., personally estimated) and objective values (in their respective contexts) make their worldviews compatible. Mises's arguments for capitalism in terms of its utility can be interpreted to be in harmony with Rand's criterion of man's life as the standard of value. There is a great deal in Mises's science of human action that is consistent with Objectivist principles. As stated by Walter Block, on the majority of issues Rand and Mises “are as alike as two peas in a pod”.Murray Rothbard (1926-1995) was a grand system builder. In his monumental Man, Economy, and State (1962), Rothbard continued, embodied, and extended Mises's methodological approach of praxeology to economics. His magnum opus was modeled after Mises's Human Action and, for the most part, was a massive restatement, defense, and development of the Misesian praxeological tradition. Rothbard followed up and complemented Man, Economy, and State with his brilliant The Ethics of Liberty (1982) in which he provided the foundation for his metanormative ethical theory. Exhibiting an architectonic character, these two works form an integrated system of philosophical economics.In a 1971 article in Modern Age Rothbard declares that Mises's work provides us with an economic paradigm grounded in the nature of man and in individual choice. He explains that Mises's paradigm furnishes economics in a systematic, integrated form that can serve as a correct alternative to the crisis situation that modern economics has engendered. According to Rothbard, it is time for us to adopt this paradigm in all of its facets.Rothbard defended Mises's methodology, but went on to construct his own edifice of Austrian economic theory. Although he embraced nearly all of Mises's economics, Rothbard could not accept Mises's Kantian extreme aprioristic position in epistemology. Mises held that the axiom of human action was true a priori to human experience and was, in fact, a synthetic a priori category. Mises considered the action axiom to be a law of thought and thus a categorical truth prior to all human experience.Rothbard agreed that the action axiom is universally true and self-evident, but argued that a person becomes aware of that axiom and its subsidiary axioms through experience in the world. A person begins with concrete human experience and then moves toward reflection. Once a person forms the basic axioms and concepts from his experiences and from his reflections upon those experiences, he does not need to resort to external experience to validate an economic hypothesis. Instead, deductive reasoning from sound basics will validate it.In a 1957 article in the Southern Economic Journal, Rothbard states that it is a waste of time to argue or try to determine how the truth of the action axiom is obtained. He explains that the all-important fact is that the axiom is self-evidently true for all people, at all places, at all times, and that it could not even conceivably be violated. Whether it was a law of thought as Mises maintained, or a law of reality as Rothbard himself contended, the axiom would be no less certain because the axiom need only be stated to become at once self-evident.Both Murray Rothbard and Ayn Rand were concerned with the nature of man and the world, natural law, natural rights, and a rational ethics based on man's nature and discovered through reason. They also agreed that the purpose of political philosophy and ethics is the promotion of productive human life on earth. In addition, both adopted, to a great extent, Lockean natural rights perspectives and arguments that legitimize private property. Additionally, they both disagreed with Mises's epistemological foundations, and on similar grounds.Both Rothbard and Rand endeavored to determine the proper rules for a rational society by using reason to examine the nature of human life and the world by employing logical deductions to ascertain what these natures suggest. They agreed with respect to the volitional nature of rational human consciousness, a man's innate right of self-ownership, and the metanormative necessity of noncoercive mutual consent. Both thus subscribed to the nonaggression principle and to the right of self-defense.Rothbard and Rand did not agree, however, on the nature of (or need for) government. They disagreed with respect to the practical applications of their similar philosophies. Rejecting Rand's idea of a constitutionally-limited representative government, Rothbard believed that their shared doctrines entailed a zero-government or anarcho-capitalist framework based on voluntarism, free exchange, and peace.Rothbard and Rand subscribed to different forms of metanormative libertarian politics—Rothbard to anarcho-capitalism and Rand to a minimal state. Unlike Rand, Rothbard ended his ethics at the metanormative level. Rand, on the other hand, advocated a minimal state form of libertarian politics based on the fuller foundation of Objectivism through which she attempted to supply an objective basis for values and virtues in human existence. Of course, Rothbard did discuss the separate importance of a rational personal morality, stated that he agreed essentially with most of Rand's philosophy, and suggested his inclination toward a Randian ethical framework. The writings of Rothbard, much like those of Menger, have done a great deal toward building a bridge between Austrian economics and Objectivism.Although Misesian economists hold that values are subjective, and Objectivists argue that values are objective, these claims are not incompatible because they are not really claims about the same things. They exist at different levels or spheres of analysis. The methodological value-subjectivity of the Austrians complements the Randian sense of value objectivity. The level of objective values dealing with personal flourishing transcends the level of subjective value preferences. The value-freedom (or value-neutrality) and value-subjectivity of the Austrians have a different function or purpose than does Objectivism's emphasis on objective values. On the one hand, the Austrian emphasis is on the value-neutrality of the economist as a scientific observer of a person acting to obtain his “subjective” (i.e., personally-estimated) values. On the other hand, the philosophy of Objectivism is concerned with values for the acting individual moral agent, himself. There is a distinction between methodological subjectivism and philosophical subjectivism. Whereas Austrians are methodological subjectivists in their economics, this does not imply that they are moral relativists as individuals.Austrian economics is thus an excellent way of looking at “social science methodology” with respect to the appraisal of means but not of ends. Misesian praxeology therefore must be augmented. Its value-free economics is not sufficient to establish a total case for liberty. A systematic, reality-based ethical system must be discovered to firmly establish a total case for liberty. Natural law provides the groundwork for such a theory, and both Objectivism and the Aristotelian idea of human flourishing are based on natural law ideas.Austrian economics and Objectivism agree on the significance of the ideas of human actions and values. The Austrians explain that a person acts when he prefers the way he thinks things will be if he acts compared to the way he thinks things will be if he fails to act. Austrian economics is descriptive and deals with the logical analysis of the ability of selected actions (i.e., means) to achieve certain ends. Whether these ends are truly objectively valuable is not the concern of the praxeological economist when he is acting in his capacity as an economist. There is another realm of values that views value in terms of objective values and correct preferences and actions. Objectivism is concerned with this other sphere and thus studies what human beings ought to value and act to attain.When thinkers from the Austrian school speak of subjective knowledge they simply mean that each person has his own specific and finite context of knowledge that directs his action. In this context, “subjective” merely means “subject-dependent”. Subjectivism for the Austrians does not mean the rejection of reality—it only focuses on the view that consumer tastes are personal.Austrian economists contend that values are subjective and Objectivists maintain that values are objective. These claims can be seen as compatible because they are not claims about the same phenomena. These two senses of value are complementary. The Austrian economist, as a neutral examiner, does not force his own value judgments on the personal values and actions of the human beings that he is studying. Operating from a different perspective, Objectivists maintain that there are objective values that stem from a man's relationship to other existents in the world.At a descriptive level, the economist's idea of demonstrated preferences agrees with Rand's account of value as something that a person acts to gain and/or keep. Of course, Rand moves from an initial descriptive notion of value to a normative perspective on value that includes the idea that a legitimate or objective value serves one's life. The second view of value provides a standard to evaluate the use of one's free will.Praxeological economics and Objectivism are complementary and compatible disciplines. Economics teaches us that social cooperation through the private property system and division of labor enables most individuals to prosper and to pursue their flourishing and happiness. In turn, Objectivism informs men how to act. In making their life-affirming ethical and value-based judgments, men can refer to and employ economic science.Objectivism's Aristotelian perspective on the nature of man and the world and on the need to exercise one's virtues can be viewed as synergic with the economic coordination and praxeology of Austrian economics. Placing the economic realm within the general process of human action, which itself is part of human nature, enables theoretical progress in our search for truth and in the construction of a systematic, logical, and consistent conceptual framework. The Objectivist worldview can provide a context to the economic insights of the Austrian economists.In conclusion, there is much common ground between Rand and the Austrians and much to be gained through the intellectual exchange between Objectivism and Austrian economics. Objectivism can be viewed as an ethical and logical augmentation of Austrian economics and Austrian praxeology can be seen as the ideal means for Objectivists when addressing economic issues. Economics would focus on attempting to discover economic principles but would leave ethical issues to philosophy.

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Original Article: How Carl Menger and the Austrians Helped to Steer Economic Theory in the Right Direction

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Original Article: How Carl Menger and the Austrians Helped to Steer Economic Theory in the Right Direction

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Original Article: How Carl Menger and the Austrians Helped to Steer Economic Theory in the Right Direction

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Narrated by Millian Quinteros.

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Original Article: How Carl Menger and the Austrians Helped to Steer Economic Theory in the Right Direction

When Adam Smith and the English classicals promoted division of labor as the most important ingredient in economic development, it took Carl Menger and his Austrian successors to point out that error and promote the proper economic theory of production. Original Article: How Carl Menger and the Austrians Helped to Steer Economic Theory in the Right Direction

In this week's Friday Gold Wrap Podcast, JD and Joel discuss why gold is down this week, Powell's comments on 60 Minutes about the debt, and some Valentine's Day thoughts inspired by Austrian economist Carl Menger. OTHER TOPICS DISCUSSED -The VIX "Fear Index" and how it's measured -Gold and silver technicals -What makes Powell different from past Fed chairmen -Debt monetization -Gold vs. diamonds -Record central bank gold buying -The week ahead Tune in to the Friday Gold Wrap each week for a recap of the week's economic and political news as it relates to gold and silver, along with some insightful commentary. For more information visit schiffgold.com/news.

One of the fallacies of modern academic neoclassical economics is that we can take cardinal measures of value. Austrian economists, beginning with Carl Menger, know better.Original article: Prices Are Not Measurements of Value

durée : 00:59:00 - Entendez-vous l'éco ? - par : Tiphaine de Rocquigny - L'école autrichienne d'économie se forme autour de la figure de Carl Menger à la fin du XIXème siècle. Quels sont ses principes ? Comment servira-t-elle de caution scientifique aux idées libertariennes ? - invités : Renaud Fillieule Professeur de sociologie à l'université de Lille

Le quattro caratteristiche fondamentali della Scuola Austriaca di economia, i suoi cinque contributi più importanti, le lontane origini che risalgono agli scolastici spagnoli tra il XVI e XVII secolo e, infine, gli sviluppi definitivi a partire dal XIX secolo con Carl Menger e Bohm Bawerk, continuati poi nel XX secolo con Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Kirzner....

Alex speaks with Scott Scheall about Carl and Karl Menger and their influence on the history of economics, liberal theory, and - yes - mathematics.    Further Reading: "Karl Menger as Son of Carl Menger" - Scott Scheall & Reinhard Schumacher https://philarchive.org/rec/SCHKMA-4  Econlib Biography of elder Menger: https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Menger.html  1871. Principles of Economics. Translated by J. Dingwall and B. F. Hoselitz, with an introduction by Friedrich A. Hayek. New York: New York University Press, 1981.   1892. “On the Origin of Money.” Economic Journal 2 (June): 239–255.   “Mises Introduces the Austrian School,” http://mises.org/daily/3512 from Ludwig von Mises, Memoirs.   Joseph T. Salerno, “Biography of Carl Menger: The Founder of the Austrian School (1840-1921),” http://mises.org/about/3239   Biography of Karl Menger    https://www.hetwebsite.net/het/profiles/kmenger.htm    Including the following Major Works: Dimensiontheorie, 1928 "On Intuitionism", 1930, Blatter der deutschen Pilosophy Kurventheorie, 1932 "The New Logic", 1933, in Krise und Neuaufbau in den Exackten Wissenschaften Moral Wille und Weltgestaltung, 1934. "The Role of Uncertainty in Economics", 1934, ZfN "Remarks on the Law of Diminishing Returns: A study in meta-economics", 1936, ZfN "The Logic of Laws of Return: A study in meta-economics", 1954, in Morgenstern, editor, Economic Activity Analysis. "Austrian Marginalism and Mathematical Economics", 1973, in Hicks and Weber, editors, Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics Morality, decision, and social organization : toward a logic of ethics, 1974. Selected Papers in Logic and Foundations, Didactics, Economics, 1979. Reminiscences of the Vienna Circle and the Mathematical Colloquium, 1994.   (ed. L. Golland, B. McGuinness and A. Sklar) [prev] "On the direction of ideas and the principal tendencies of the Vienna Mathematical Colloqium", 1998,  in E. Dierker &  K. Sigismund, editors, Karl Menger Ergebnisse eines Mathematischen Kolloquiums    

Carl Menger es el fundador de la Escuela Económica Austriaca. Su primer libro, Principios de economía política, a pesar de ser un texto más bien breve, abrió fronteras nuevas e importantes en el pensamiento económico e instauró una nueva forma de ver la acción económica. El libro, no obstante, presenta una interesante paradoja, pues Menger pretendía demostrar la existencia de leyes en la ciencia económica, pero la economía austriaca moderna se concentra en el papel de la innovación empresarial y la ruptura de las reglas, tal como muestra el trabajo del profesor Huerta de Soto. A lo largo de esta sesión con András Toth analizaremos esta presunta paradoja, así como las implicaciones de las ideas de Menger en nuestra visión sociológica de la sociedad y la política.    Si te ha gustado el programa, déjanos un comentario y danos una valoración alta en la plataforma donde lo hayas escuchado. No olvides darte de alta en www.valueschool.es para obtener información sobre nuestras actividades y acceder a todo nuestro material gratuito. Recuerda que también puedes seguirnos en Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn y en nuestro canal de YouTube. (Música: "Corporate Innovative" by Scott Holmes). http://www.scottholmesmusic.com 

La escuela de Salamanca. Lecturas sobre teoría monetaria española es un libro que cambió el mapa de la historia del pensamiento económico. Hasta el momento de su publicación, los especialistas no habían reparado en la importancia de la reformulación de la teoría del valor subjetivo hecha por los doctores salmantinos. En su explicación psicológica basada en el concepto de la utilidad se encontraba, además, el germen de las teorías de la moderna escuela austriaca, propuestas a finales del siglo XIX por Carl Menger. A lo largo de esta sesión repasaremos con el profesor Luis Perdices de Blas las ideas fundamentales de este libro, por fin disponible para los lectores de habla hispana.  Si te ha gustado el programa, déjanos un comentario y danos una valoración alta en la plataforma donde lo hayas escuchado. No olvides darte de alta en www.valueschool.es para obtener información sobre nuestras actividades y acceder a todo nuestro material gratuito. Recuerda que también puedes seguirnos en Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn y en nuestro canal de YouTube. (Música: "Corporate Innovative" by Scott Holmes). http://www.scottholmesmusic.com 

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

In Seven Crashes: The Economic Crises That Shaped Globalization (Yale UP, 2023), distinguished economic historian Harold James offers a fresh perspective on the past two centuries of globalization and the pivotal moments that shaped it. James analyzes seven major economic crises that occurred over this period, including the late 1840s, the simultaneous stock market shocks of 1873, the First World War years, the Great Depression era, the 1970s, the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, and most recently the Covid-19 crisis. Through his insightful analysis, he illustrates how some of these crises contributed to increased cross-border integration of labor, goods, and capital markets, while others resulted in significant deglobalization. James classifies the crises into two categories: those caused by shortages and those driven by demand. He explains how shortages have led to greater globalization as markets expanded and producers innovated to increase supply, as evidenced by events such as the First World War and the oil shocks of the 1970s. In contrast, demand-driven crises, such as those that caused the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008, have typically led to international trade contraction and decreased globalization, often accompanied by widespread skepticism of governments. To support his findings, James examines the writings of key observers who shaped our understanding of each crisis, including Karl Marx in 1848, Stanley Jevons, Léon Walras, and Carl Menger in the 1870s, German Treasury Secretary Karl Helfferich in the First World War, John Maynard Keynes in the Great Depression, Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in the 1970s, Ben Bernanke in 2008, and Larry Summers and Raj Chetty in 2020. Overall, James' work provides an insightful and thought-provoking analysis of the relationship between economic crises and globalization over the past two centuries, and sheds light on the potential trajectory of future economic developments. Javier Mejia is an economist at Stanford University who specializes in the intersection of social networks and economic history. His research interests also include entrepreneurship and political economy, with a particular focus on Latin America and the Middle East. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Los Andes University. Mejia has previously been a Postdoctoral Associate and Lecturer at New York University-Abu Dhabi and a Visiting Scholar at the University of Bordeaux. He is also a frequent contributor to various news outlets, currently serving as an op-ed columnist for Forbes Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One of the fundamental tenets of Austrian economics is the ordinal value scale. Augustine articulated the idea more than a thousand years before Carl Menger wrote his pathbreaking Principles of Economics. Original Article: "Saint Augustine, Proto-Austrian" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

One of the fundamental tenets of Austrian economics is the ordinal value scale. Augustine articulated the idea more than a thousand years before Carl Menger wrote his pathbreaking Principles of Economics. Original Article: "Saint Augustine, Proto-Austrian" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

The roots of Austrian economics go back to the great theologian Thomas Aquinas, whose view of what constitutes a good was a prototype of Menger's pathbreaking theory of the good. Original Article: "Defining a Good: The Intersection of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Carl Menger" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

The roots of Austrian economics go back to the great theologian Thomas Aquinas, whose view of what constitutes a good was a prototype of Menger's pathbreaking theory of the good. Original Article: "Defining a Good: The Intersection of St. Thomas Aquinas and Carl Menger" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

The roots of Austrian economics go back to the great theologian Thomas Aquinas, whose view of what constitutes a good was a prototype of Menger's pathbreaking theory of the good. Original Article: "Defining a Good: The Intersection of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Carl Menger" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

The roots of Austrian economics go back to the great theologian Thomas Aquinas, whose view of what constitutes a good was a prototype of Menger's pathbreaking theory of the good. Original Article: "Defining a Good: The Intersection of St. Thomas Aquinas and Carl Menger" This Audio Mises Wire is generously sponsored by Christopher Condon.

David Scott interviews economist Robert P Murphy senior Fellow of the Mises Institute, known as Bob Murphy to his many fans and followers. Bob is a economist of the Austrian School, a group based on 500 years of economic thought and in particular on the work of Carl Menger, Ludwig Von Mises and Murray Rothbard. It is based on anaylsis of human action and motivation and is built, piece by piece, in deductive fashion, upon these principles. In this interview David explains how he discovered the Austrian School and the extent of the intellectual revelation it provided to him and Bob explains briefly what the Austrian School is and what unique insights it offers. The discussion covers the 2008 great recesion and the role the Austrain theory of the business cycle played in predicting and explaining it. Bob and David also discuss inflation, it's effects and it mysterious temporary absence and sudden tumultuous arrival. In doing so they touch on the strange economics of the covid lockdown, Another of Bob's specialisms, of particular relevance today, is the economics of engergy generation and of climate change. He outlines his work in this area, and highlights the contradictions and holes in the official narrative. The effects of these are to generate policy prescriptions which, although they may serve a political purpose, are both untenable and injurious to human thriving. They make no sense, even accepting the global warming narrative and considering the policies within that worldview. This serves to illustrate just how good-for-nothing the current Net Zero religion has beome in recent years. David questions whether economics is really value-free and gets Bob's view of the values and ethics elements inherent in economic analysis. In closing David raised the spectre of Paul Krugman and the unexpected presence of Austrian Economics Groupies - Is Bob only in this for the Groupies, tune in to find out. https://youtu.be/d0nERTFo-Sk https://youtu.be/GTQnarzmTOc

Out of this paradoxical mish-mash of empire, Fascism, Catholicism, tradition, and modernity stepped a big dose of genius. Men who became giants in their fields, ranging from music to economics to psychoanalysis, many of whom fled Fascism to settle in western Europe or the United States. A partial list: Carl Menger, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Rudolph Carnap, Sigmund Freud, Martin Buber, Karl Popper, Viktor Frankl, Arnold Schoenberg, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek.And Eric Voegelin.Voegelin is possibly the least known but possibly the greatest among them. He was poor at self-promotion, his prose was difficult, and his ideas were nearly impossible to appreciate. To compound the problem, he refused to “write down” to make his prose more accessible, insisting the reader make the required effort to understand the problem that was modernity, and then he compounded the problem even more by using neologisms that no one understood. Voegelin biographies spend a lot of time defining words, some even including a separate glossary at the end.But I suspect the real reason Voegelin never really caught on like, say, Freud or von Mises: He simply didn't resonate. Luther wouldn't have resonated in the 11thcentury; Nietzsche would have lived with the wolves in the 8th.Voegelin, with the analytic precision of a mathematician, tried to explain how transcendence plays into earthly politics. It wasn't a song that played well in the exuberant and optimistic days of post-WWII America, which cared for such things about as much as Stalin cared about the Pope's legions.On top of that, I believe Voegelin set himself an impossible task. The Tao can't be explained in mathematical terms. But he was also correct: The Tao can't be ignored, whether currently or in historical explanations.Show notes here

In perhaps his most comprehensive interview to date, Saifedean talks to Lex Fridman about the history of money, the foundations of economics, and why bitcoin represents a pathway to a more peaceful and prosperous world. Starting from Lex's question “What is money?”, Saifedean draws on insights from his most recent book, The Fiat Standard, to take the listener on a four-hour historical journey. He explains how money emerged as a market good; why the gold standard developed in Britain and spread across the world; and the intriguing historical circumstances that led to government-controlled fiat money becoming the global medium of exchange. By asking fundamental questions about money, the purpose of economics, and the technical foundations of bitcoin, Lex prompts Saifedean to present a first-principles case for free exchange, non-aggression and bitcoin. Their conversation also includes Saifedean's reflections on his upbringing in Palestine, how to make the most of our short time on earth, and advice to younger generations. ResourcesLex Fridman on Twitter.Lex Fridman's podcast website.Carl Menger's Principles of Economics: the founding text of the Austrian School, published in 1871.Human Action by Ludwig von Mises, published in English in 1949.Critical overview of John Maynard Keynes' The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money in the Journal of Libertarian Studies.Saifedean Twitter thread on scientists who dismissed flight as impossible at the time the Wright brothers were inventing the airplane. Includes comments by Lord Kelvin and the New York Times.Graphic showing technological progress in Britain during the gold standard. For further discussion, see The Bitcoin Standard section: Innovations: “Zero to One” versus “One to Many”, and episode 74 of The Bitcoin Standard Podcast: The Real Drivers of Technological Progress.Saifedean paper on the decline of the aviation industry since the 1970s. For further discussion see chapter 10 of The Fiat Standard on Fiat Fuels.The Bitcoin Standard Podcast episode 108: A New World Monetary Order The ramifications of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Bitcoin Net Zero paper by Nic Carter and Ross Stevens. See page 38 for comparison of bitcoin network energy consumption compared with tumble driers and other common household appliances.Saifedean's first book, The Bitcoin Standard.Saifedean's second book, The Fiat Standard.

[NOTE of Irony: Hours after we recorded this episode, it was announced that Musk made an offer to buy Twitter. Thanks, Elon!] The crew talks about the recent move by Elon Musk to take a major equity stake in Twitter, and the some implications this may have for the platform. But more importantly, it sparks discussion for many issues around social media itself. Is it a good thing? Is it a bad thing? How and why? They also talk about the recent debate on social media between Jonathan Haidt (The Righteous Mind) and Robby Soave from Reason, and a major article by Haidt in the Atlantic on social media as the new Tower of Babel. Finally, Aaron and our guest for the show, Olivia, talk about some interesting economic ideas that are often overlooked from Carl Menger regarding money demand and how inflations works.

What were the contributions of Carl Menger, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, and Friedrich von Wieser? Join FFF president Jacob G. Hornberger and Citadel professor Richard M. Ebeling as they examine these three earliest Austrian economists. Please subscribe to our email newsletter FFF Daily here.