Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.
The author or concept searched is found in the following 10 entries.
| Disputed term/author/ism | Author |
Entry |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Economic Calculation | Mises | Coyne I 11 Calculation/Mises/Coyne/Boettke: „The fundamental objection advanced against the practicability of socialism refers to the impossibility of economic calculation. It has been demonstrated in an irrefutable way that a socialist commonwealth would not be in a position to apply economic calculation ... A socialist management ofproduction would simply not know whether or not what it plans and executes is the most appropriate means to attain the ends sought. It will operate in the dark, as it were. It will squander the scarce factors of production both material and human (labour). Chaos and poverty for all will unavoidably result.“ Ludwig von Mises (1922/ 1981(1)), 535. Coyne I 12 Coyne/Boettke: Economic calculation is the ability of economic actors to determine the expected value added of a potential use of a scarce resource. By comparing the expected value across potential alternatives, decision-makers are able to gauge which activities will have the highest value from the perspective of consumers. Judging the expected value across alternatives requires market-determined prices, which capture the relative scarcity of resources while allowing for a common unit for comparison. Mises: Mises argued that without property rights in the means of production, which the socialists wanted to abolish, there could be no economic calculation because there would be no money prices. His argument proceeded in three steps. First, without private ownership of the means ofproduction, a market for the means of production would not exist. You cannot have voluntary trade without the ownership of resources that allows for the exchange of those resources by owners. Second, without this market, there would not be money prices for the means of production. Monetary prices, which arise through market trade, are exchange ratios that capture the opportunity cost of a resource. If a cup of coffee is $ 1 and a bottle of soda is $2, this means that the price of a soda is two cups of coffee. By providing a common unit for comparison across goods and services, money prices allow people throughout the economy to judge the opportunity cost, or trade off, of engaging in one course of action over another. >Opportunity costs. Finally, without money prices for the means of production rational economic calculation is not possible because there is no way for decision-makers to judge the expected value added of alternative courses of action. Price/Mises: Money prices, according to Mises, emerge as the unintended outcome of the voluntary interaction of a multitude of individuals pursuing their separate and often conflicting plans in a market setting characterized by private ownership allowing for exchange. >Price. Coyne I 12 The prices that emerge in the market convey general knowledge about the relative scarcities of particular goods, and thus serve as "aids to the human mind" for calculating how resources should be used. MisesVsSocialism: In the absence of a market for the means of production, Mises asked, how would the Central Planning Board know which projects were economically feasible and which were not? Example: (…) how would planners know whether or not to use platinum to construct railroad tracks? Platinum, after all, is technologically feasible as an input to construct railways. In a market system, economic decisionmakers responsible for constructing the railroad would look at the price of platinum, which captures its relative scarcity, and attempt to gauge whether they expected to make a profit given the cost of the inputs (platinum being one). MisesVsSocialism: Abolishing prices - through the joint abolition of property rights and mone - would mean that planners would be unable to determine whether platinum or some other good should be used to construct railroad tracks. The result would be economic chaos in contrast to the rational order promised by proponents of the socialist system. SocialsmVsVs: The socialists took Mises's critique seriously and revised their vision. The result was a model of "market socialism," offered by Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner, which sought to maintain the desirable features of the socialist system while addressing the critiques raised by Mises. Solution: The market socialist model included the use of money and allowed for a free market in final consumer goods and in labour markets. The means of production would still be nationalized. A Central Planning Board would be responsible for providing provisional ("shadow") prices for inputs to firms. Based on these provisional prices, firms would be instructed to select the combination of inputs that minimized the cost ofproducing the level of outputs that maximized profits. Problem: But how were firms to know this level of output? Solution: The Central Planning Board would instruct firms to follow the dictates of the perfectly competitive model by setting their prices equal to the marginal costs ofproduction and to produce those levels of output that minimize average costs. >Planned economy, >Planned Economy/Soviet Union, >Socialism/Mises, >Socialism/Hayek. 1. Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis (Indianapolis: Liberty Press/Liberty Classics, 1981). German editions, 1922, 1932. English translation by J. Kahane, 1936; enlarged with an Epilogue, Planned Chaos, 1951; Jonathan Cape, 1969. |
EconMises I Ludwig von Mises Die Gemeinwirtschaft Jena 1922 Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Equilibrium | Hayek | Coyne I 13 Equilibrium/Hayek/Coyne/Boettke: There can be no static, fixed equilibrium for two reasons. The first is human error, which leads to opportunities for reallocating resources through the discovery of mistakes. The second is that market conditions are constantly evolving, which makes prior equilibrium conditions irrelevant. Even if some stable equilibrium were obtained, it would be fleeting as conditions changed. It is only by allowing decentralized People to participate in an ongoing process of discovery that the knowledge necessary to make rational economic decisions emerges. These numerous discoveries lead to the emergence of knowledge regarding not only what goods and services are desired by consumers, but also the most effective techniques to produce these outputs in a cost-minimizing manner. HayekVsSocialism: The problems inherent with market socialism, according to Hayek, were not a matter of placing smarter people in charge or in developing new computational techniques to gather more information. Instead, the issue was that the economic knowledge necessary for coordination is dispersed, tacit, and emergent. Coyne I 14 This means that the knowledge used by people to coordinate their economic affairs cannot exist outside the context within which they are embedded. The market socialism model left no space for the very activity that generated the knowledge that was necessary for planners to accomplish their stated ends of advanced material production. As such, Hayek concluded, the model failed to address the dynamic problem that planning would have to confront in practice once the market socialism system was implemented. >Planned economy, >Calculation, >Prices. |
Hayek I Friedrich A. Hayek The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents--The Definitive Edition (The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek, Volume 2) Chicago 2007 Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Interventionism | Mises | Rothbard IV 30 Socialism/Interventionism/Mises/Rothbard: Austrian economics had always implicitly favored a free-market policy, but in the quiet and relatively free world of the late nineteenth century, the Austrians had never bothered to develop an explicit analysis of freedom or of government intervention. In an environment of accelerating statism and socialism, Ludwig von Mises, while continuing to develop his business cycle theory, turned his powerful attention to analyzing the economics of government intervention and planning. His journal article of 1920, “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth,”(1) was a blockbuster: demonstrating for the first time that socialism was an unviable system for an industrial economy; … MisesVsSocialism: …for Mises showed that a socialist economy, being deprived of a free-market price system, could not rationally calculate costs or allocate factors of production efficiently to their most needed tasks. Mises incorporated his insights into a comprehensive critique of socialism, Socialism (1922)(2). Interventions/Mises: If socialism cannot work, then neither can the specific acts of government intervention into the market which Mises dubbed “interventionism.” In a series of articles during the 1920s, Mises criticized and disposed of a host of statist economic measures, articles which were collected into Kritik des Interventionismus (1929)(3). If neither socialism nor interventionism were viable, then we are left with “laissez-faire” liberalism, or the free-market economy, and Mises expanded on his analysis of the merits of classical liberalism in his notable Liberalismus(4) (1927). In Liberalismus, Mises showed the close interconnection between international peace, civil liberties, and the free-market economy. >Laisser-faire, >Liberalism. 1. “Die Wirtschaftsrechnung im sozialistischen Gemeinwesen,” in Archiv für Sozialwissenschaften 47 (1920): 86–121. Translated into English by S. Adler and inluded in F.A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies of the Possibilities of Socialism (London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1935). 2. Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis (Indianapolis: Liberty Press/Liberty Classics, 1981). German editions, 1922, 1932. English translation by J. Kahane, 1936; enlarged with an Epilogue, Planned Chaos, 1951; Jonathan Cape, 1969. 3. Ludwig von Mises, A Critique of Interventionism, trans. by Hans F. Sennholz (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House, 1977); reprinted 1996 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Original German edition in 1976 by Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (Darmstadt, Germany), with a Foreword by F.A. Hayek. 4. Liberalism: A Socio-Economic Exposition, trans. Ralph Raico, Arthur Goddard, Ludwig von Mises, ed. (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, 1978); 1962 edition, The Free and Prosperous Commonwealth (Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand). Coyne I 29 Interventionism/Mises/Coyne/Boettke: (…) Interventionism (…) requires employing the discretionary power of the administrative state to replace the preferences of private economic actors with those of policymakers. (…) government interference in a market generates a range of interrelated effects on economic activity. In addition, subsequent attempts by policymakers to counteract the emergence of unintended consequences and to make the initial intervention yield the desired results leads to increasingly extensive controls over economic activity, which threatens the dynamism of the market process. Cf. >Spontaneous order, >Markets. Interventionism is a form of non-comprehensive planning. It does not abolish ownership over the means of production or attempt to plan all economic activity, as under socialism. But it does involve piecemeal economic planning. Under Piece-meal planning, policymakers replace what emerged through the market process with their own judgments of what they believe should exist. >Planning, >Planned economy. The underlying implicit assumption of interventionism, therefore, is that policymakers have access to the economic knowledge necessary to engage in piecemeal planning to achieve their ends. More specifically, there are three types of economic knowledge that policymakers are assumed to possess. 1) First, since government interventions into the market are justified as a means of improving social welfare, the policymakers are assumed to possess knowledge of ways of allocating scarce resources that are superior to the market alternative. 2) Second, intervenors are assumed to possess knowledge of how to adjust interventions in the face of constant change. As broader economic conditions change, so too will the effcacy of even well-intentioned interventions. Given the goal of improving social welfare, past intervention will need to be continually revised, and perhaps removed or replaced, in the face of changing circumstances. This requires that policymakers possess knowledge of the new conditions as well as the knowledge of how best to revise existing regulations or introduce new regulations that improve social welfare in the face of circumstances different from those in the past. 3) Third, the policymakers are assumed to possess knowledge of what would have emerged absent the intervention. Claiming an intervention is necessary to achieve an outcome implies that the same outcome, or an even better outcome, would not have emerged in future periods absent the intervention. Knowledge/Mises/Hayek: The main constraint on policymakers in obtaining each of these categories of economic knowledge is the knowledge problem that Mises and Hayek highlighted during the socialist calculation debate. Absent the ability to rely on market-determined prices and profit and loss, there is no way for policymakers to know the highest-valued uses of scarce resources. >Ignorance/Kirzner. VsInterventionism/Problems: This ignorance poses issues for the initial design of interventions because there is no way for policymakers to acquire the tacit and context-specific knowledge of dispersed actors throughout society. As a result, they cannot have superior knowledge, relative to market participants, about the allocation of resources. This same issue also plagues attempts by policymakers to revise interventions as conditions change. Since they are unable to acquire the economic knowledge of time and place necessary to determine the best allocation of scarce resources, there is no way to ensure that interventions will be revised and adjusted to improve social welfare. Finally, since the market is an open-ended process of competition, discovery, and change, there is no way for policy-makers to know what would have emerged through voluntary interaction and exchange absent the intervention. This makes it impossible for policymakers to determine if an intervention has produced an outcome that is superior to the counterfactual - namely, the spontaneous order that would have emerged if economic actors were left to engage without intervention in discovery and exchange. >Interventions/Austrian School. |
EconMises I Ludwig von Mises Die Gemeinwirtschaft Jena 1922 Rothbard II Murray N. Rothbard Classical Economics. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham 1995 Rothbard III Murray N. Rothbard Man, Economy and State with Power and Market. Study Edition Auburn, Alabama 1962, 1970, 2009 Rothbard IV Murray N. Rothbard The Essential von Mises Auburn, Alabama 1988 Rothbard V Murray N. Rothbard Power and Market: Government and the Economy Kansas City 1977 Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Planned Economy | Soviet Union | Coyne I 12 Planned Economy/Soviet Union/Coyne/Boettke: MisesVsSocialism: Abolishing prices - through the joint abolition of property rights and mone - would mean that planners would be unable to determine whether platinum or some other good should be used to construct railroad tracks. The result would be economic chaos in contrast to the rational order promised by proponents of the socialist system. >Socialism/Mises, >Calculation, >Price/Mises, >Planned economy/Mises. SocialsmVsVs: The socialists took Mises's critique seriously and revised their vision. The result was a model of "market socialism," offered by Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner, which sought to maintain the desirable features of the socialist system while addressing the critiques raised by Mises. Solution: The market socialist model included the use of money and allowed for a free market in final consumer goods and in labour markets. The means of production would still be nationalized. A Central Planning Board would be responsible for providing provisional ("shadow") prices for inputs to firms. Based on these provisional prices, firms would be instructed to select the combination of inputs that minimized the cost ofproducing the level of outputs that maximized profits. Problem: But how were firms to know this level of output? Solution: The Central Planning Board would instruct firms to follow the dictates of the perfectly competitive model by setting their prices equal to the marginal costs of production and to produce those levels of output that minimize average costs. Coyne I 13 The market socialists were aware that the Central Planning Board might select the incorrect provisional prices - that is, prices that did not reflect the true underlying scarcity. They argued, however, that this would not pose a problem because adjustments could be made on a trial-and-error basis based on inventories that would be observable to the planning board. Just as markets tended to correct for surpluses by putting downward pressure on prices, so too could the Central Planning Board by adjusting prices in the face of excess inventories. Similarly, just as markets respond to shortages with increases in prices, so too would planners who would dictate higher prices in the face of a lack of inventory. According to the market socialists, this process would mimic, if not exceed, the effciency of markets while maintaining the economic, social, and political goals of socialism. Socialism/HayekVsSocialism: It is here that F.A. Hayek entered the debate. The market socialists, Hayek argued, were preoccupied with a static notion of equilibrium where all relevant economic knowledge was given, known, and frozen. >Socialism/Hayek. |
Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Political Economy | Mill | Höffe I 351 Political Economy/Mill/Höffe: According to socialist authors such as the Englishman Robert Owen (1771-1858) (...) and the Frenchman Louis Blanc (1811-1882), free competition is to be abolished and the state is to be assigned the entirety of economic tasks. MillVsBlanc/MillVsOwen/MillVsSocialism: Mill(1) counters this with the argument that individuals can act selfishly and judge their own interests best. Especially in the economic sphere, the counter-strategy to socialism, the non-intervention of the state (laisser-faire), brings about a double optimization: for Mill as a >utilitarian the most efficient state activity and for him as a liberal the strongest incentive for the development of individuals. Humans/Mill: Mill rejects the two "economistic" views, on the other hand, that the human is a homo oeconomicus by nature and that in social life the primacy of the economy is due. People, he says, have other things more important than satisfying their needs and interests by purchasing relevant goods and services as rationally as possible. What is decisive are those things such as ideas and fine arts, which humans seek for their own sake. Last but not least, instead of the economy, politics alone deserves - and should complement, humane and humanitarian practice - priority(1). 1. J. St. Mill, Principles of Political Economy 1848 |
Mill I John St. Mill A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, London 1843 German Edition: Von Namen, aus: A System of Logic, London 1843 In Eigennamen, Ursula Wolf Frankfurt/M. 1993 Mill II J. St. Mill Utilitarianism: 1st (First) Edition Oxford 1998 Mill Ja I James Mill Commerce Defended: An Answer to the Arguments by which Mr. Spence, Mr. Cobbett, and Others, Have Attempted to Prove that Commerce is Not a Source of National Wealth 1808 Höffe I Otfried Höffe Geschichte des politischen Denkens München 2016 |
| Price | Mises | Rothbard III 754 Price/Mises/Rothbard: „Prices are a market phenomenon.... They are the resultant of a certain constellation of market data, of actions and reactions of the members of a market society. It is vain to meditate what prices would have been if some of their determinants had been different.... It is no less vain to ponder on what prices ought to be. Everybody is pleased ifthe prices of things he wants to buy drop and the prices of the things he wants to sell rise.... Any price determined on a market is the necessary outgrowth of the interplay of the forces operating, that is, demand and supply. Whatever the market situation which generated this price may be, with regard to it the price is always adequate, genuine, and real. It cannot be higher if no bidder ready to offer a higher price turns up, and it cannot be Iower if no seller ready to deliver at a Iower price turns up. Only the appearance of such people ready to buy or sell can alter prices. Economics ... does not develop formulas which would enable anybody to compute a "correct" price different from that established on the market by the interaction of buyers and sellers.... This refers also to monopoly prices.... No alleged "factfinding" and no armchair speculation can discover another price at which demand and supply would become equal. The failure of all experiments to find a satisfactory solution for the limited-space monopoly of public utilities clearly proves this truth.“(1) >Monopoly price/Economic theories, >Monopolies, >Social goods, >Supply, >Demand. 1. Mises, Human Action, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1949. Reprinted by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1998. pp. 392-94. Coyne I 12 Price/Mises/Coyne/Boettke: Money prices, according to Mises, emerge as the unintended outcome of the voluntary interaction of a multitude of individuals pursuing their separate and often conflicting plans in a market setting characterized by private ownership allowing for exchange. allowing for exchange. The prices that emerge in the market convey general knowledge about the relative scarcities of particular goods, and thus serve as "aids to the human mind" for calculating how resources should be used. MisesVsSocialism: In the absence of a market for the means of production, Mises asked, how would the Central Planning Board know which projects were economically feasible and which were not? Example: (…) how would planners know whether or not to use platinum to construct railroad tracks? Platinum, after all, is technologically feasible as an input to construct railways. In a market system, economic decisionmakers responsible for constructing the railroad would look at the price of platinum, which captures its relative scarcity, and attempt to gauge whether they expected to make a profit given the cost of the inputs (platinum being one). MisesVsSocialism: Abolishing prices - through the joint abolition of property rights and mone - would mean that planners would be unable to determine whether platinum or some other good should be used to construct railroad tracks. The result would be economic chaos in contrast to the rational order promised by proponents of the socialist system. SocialsmVsVs: The socialists took Mises's critique seriously and revised their vision. The result was a model of "market socialism," offered by Oskar Lange and Abba Lerner, which sought to maintain the desirable features of the socialist system while addressing the critiques raised by Mises. Solution: The market socialist model included the use of money and allowed for a free market in final consumer goods and in labour markets. The means of production would still be nationalized. A Central Planning Board would be responsible for providing provisional ("shadow") prices for inputs to firms. Based on these provisional prices, firms would be instructed to select the combination of inputs that minimized the cost of producing the level of outputs that maximized profits. Problem: But how were firms to know this level of output? Solution: The Central Planning Board would instruct firms to follow the dictates of the perfectly competitive model by setting their prices equal to the marginal costs of production and to produce those levels of output that minimize average costs. |
EconMises I Ludwig von Mises Die Gemeinwirtschaft Jena 1922 Rothbard II Murray N. Rothbard Classical Economics. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham 1995 Rothbard III Murray N. Rothbard Man, Economy and State with Power and Market. Study Edition Auburn, Alabama 1962, 1970, 2009 Rothbard IV Murray N. Rothbard The Essential von Mises Auburn, Alabama 1988 Rothbard V Murray N. Rothbard Power and Market: Government and the Economy Kansas City 1977 Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Racism | Friedman | Landsburg I 55 Racism/solution/Friedman: (…) Friedman makes the point that capitalism is particularly hostile territory for racial, religious and political discrimination precisely because it disperses economic activity so widely that you usually know absolutely nothing about the race, religion, or politics of the people you’re trading with. When you buy a car in a capitalist country, you have no idea whether the wheels were attached by a Republican, a communist, a pagan, a Hindu, a lesbian, a polyamorist, or a person with skin that’s lighter or darker than yours. That makes it essentially impossible for customers to discriminate against any of those groups. >Freedom/Friedman. FriedmanVsSocialism: By contrast, if the car companies were all controlled by the government, it would be much easier for a group of bigoted customers to lobby for discriminatory hiring practices. |
Econ Fried I Milton Friedman The role of monetary policy 1968 Landsburg I Steven E. Landsburg The Essential Milton Friedman Vancouver: Fraser Institute 2019 |
| Socialism | Hayek | Coyne I 13 Socialism/Hayek/Coyne/Boettke: [The socialists argued:] Just as markets tended to correct for surpluses by putting downward pressure on prices, so too could the Central Planning Board by adjusting prices in the face of excess inventories. Similarly, just as markets respond to shortages with increases in prices, so too would planners who would dictate higher prices in the face of a lack of inventory. According to the market socialists, this process would mimic, if not exceed, the effciency of markets while maintaining the economic, social, and political goals of socialism. HayekVsSocialism: It is here that F.A. Hayek entered the debate. The market socialists, Hayek argued, were preoccupied with a static notion of equilibrium where all relevant economic knowledge was given, known, and frozen. of equilibrium where all relevant economic knowledge was given, known, and frozen. Only in a state offinal equilibrium, where prices are known and fixed, could firms set a price equal to marginal cost and minimize average costs as dictated by the market socialist model. Hayek argued that, instead of assuming that this information existed, focus must be on the process through which this knowledge emerges. This process involves experimentation and contestation in an openended system. Equilibrium/Hayek: There can be no static, fixed equilibrium for two reasons. The first is human error, which leads to opportunities for reallocating resources through the discovery of mistakes. The second is that market conditions are constantly evolving, which makes prior equilibrium conditions irrelevant. Even if some stable equilibrium were obtained, it would be fleeting as conditions changed. It is only by allowing decentralized People to participate in an ongoing process of discovery that the knowledge necessary to make rational economic decisions emerges. These numerous discoveries lead to the emergence of knowledge regarding not only what goods and services are desired by consumers, but also the most effective techniques to produce these outputs in a cost-minimizing manner. The problems inherent with market socialism, according to Hayek, were not a matter of placing smarter people in charge or in developing new computational techniques to gather more information. Instead, the issue was that the economic knowledge necessary for coordination is dispersed, tacit, and emergent. Coyne I 14 This means that the knowledge used by people to coordinate their economic affairs cannot exist outside the context within which they are embedded. The market socialism model left no space for the very activity that generated the knowledge that was necessary for planners to accomplish their stated ends of advanced material production. As such, Hayek concluded, the model failed to address the dynamic problem that planning would have to confront in practice once the market socialism system was implemented. >Planned economy, >Calculation, >Prices. |
Hayek I Friedrich A. Hayek The Road to Serfdom: Text and Documents--The Definitive Edition (The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek, Volume 2) Chicago 2007 Coyne I Christopher J. Coyne Peter J. Boettke The Essential Austrian Economics Vancouver 2020 |
| Socialism | Mises | Rothbard IV 30 Socialism/Interventionism/Mises/Rothbard: Austrian economics had always implicitly favored a free-market policy, but in the quiet and relatively free world of the late nineteenth century, the Austrians had never bothered to develop an explicit analysis of freedom or of government intervention. In an environment of accelerating statism and socialism, Ludwig von Mises, while continuing to develop his business cycle theory, turned his powerful attention to analyzing the economics of government intervention and planning. His journal article of 1920, “Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth,”(1) was a blockbuster: demonstrating for the first time that socialism was an unviable system for an industrial economy; … MisesVsSocialism: …for Mises showed that a socialist economy, being deprived of a free-market price system, could not rationally calculate costs or allocate factors of production efficiently to their most needed tasks. Mises incorporated his insights into a comprehensive critique of socialism, Socialism (1922)(2). Interventions/Mises: If socialism cannot work, then neither can the specific acts of government intervention into the market which Mises dubbed “interventionism.” In a series of articles during the 1920s, Mises criticized and disposed of a host of statist economic measures, articles which were collected into Kritik des Interventionismus (1929)(3). If neither socialism nor interventionism were viable, then we are left with “laissez-faire” liberalism, or the free-market economy, and Mises expanded on his analysis of the merits of classical liberalism in his notable Liberalismus(4) (1927). In Liberalismus, Mises showed the close interconnection between international peace, civil liberties, and the free-market economy. >Laisser-faire, >Liberalism. 1. “Die Wirtschaftsrechnung im sozialistischen Gemeinwesen,” in Archiv für Sozialwissenschaften 47 (1920): 86–121. Translated into English by S. Adler and inluded in F.A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies of the Possibilities of Socialism (London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1935). 2. Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis (Indianapolis: Liberty Press/Liberty Classics, 1981). German editions, 1922, 1932. English translation by J. Kahane, 1936; enlarged with an Epilogue, Planned Chaos, 1951; Jonathan Cape, 1969. 3. Ludwig von Mises, A Critique of Interventionism, trans. by Hans F. Sennholz (New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House, 1977); reprinted 1996 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Original German edition in 1976 by Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (Darmstadt, Germany), with a Foreword by F.A. Hayek. 4. Liberalism: A Socio-Economic Exposition, trans. Ralph Raico, Arthur Goddard, Ludwig von Mises, ed. (Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, 1978); 1962 edition, The Free and Prosperous Commonwealth (Princeton, N.J.: D. Van Nostrand). Rothbard III 613 Socialism/calculation/Mises/Rothbard: Economic calculation becomes ever more important as the market economy develops and progresses, as the stages and the complexities of type and variety of capital goods increase. Ever more important for the maintenance of an advanced economy, then, is the preservation of markets for all the capital and other producers' goods. Socialism: Our analysis serves to expand the famous discussion of the possibility of economic calculation under socialism, launched by Professor Ludwig von Mises(…).(1) Mises, (…) has demonstrated irrefutably that a socialist economic system cannot calculate, since it lacks a market, and hence lacks prices for producers' and especially for capital goods. Now we see that, paradoxically, the reason why a socialist economy cannot calculate is not specifically because it is socialist! Socialism is that system in which the State forcibly seizes control of all the means of production in the economy. The reason for the impossibility of calculation under socialism is that one agent owns or directs the use of all the resources in the economy. It should be clear that it does not make any difference whether that one agent is the State or one private individual or private cartel. Whichever occurs, there is no possibility of calculation anywhere in the production structure, since production processes would be only internal and wirhout markets. >Economic calculation/Rothbard, >Free market/Rothbard. VsMises: A curious legend has become quite popular among the writers on the socialist side of the debate over economic calculation. This runs as follows: Mises, in his original article, asserted "theoretically" that there could be no economic calculation under socialism; Barone proved mathematically that this is false and that calculation is possible; Hayek and Robbins conceded the validity of this proof but then asserted that calculation would not be "practical." The inference is that the argument of Mises has been disposed of and that all socialism needs is a few practical devices (perhaps calculating machines) or economic advisers to permit calculation and the "counting of the equations." This legend is almost completely wrong from start to finish. In the first Place, the dichotomy between "theoretical" and "practical" is a false one. In economics, all arguments are theoretical. And, since economics discusses the real world, these theoretical arguments are by their nature "practical" ones as well. 1. See the classic presentation of the position in Ludwig von Mises, "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth," reprinted in F.A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning (London: George Routledge & Sons, 193 5), pp. 8 7—130. Also see in the Hayek volume the other essays by Hayek, Pierson, and Halm. Mises continued his argument in Socialism (2nd ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1951), pp. 135—63, and refutes more recent criticisms in his Human Action, New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1949. Reprinted by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, 1998. pp. 694-711. Aside from these works, the best book on the subject of economic calculation under socialism is Trygve J.B. Hoff, Economic Calculation in the socialist Society (London: William Hodge, 1949). Also see F.A. Hayek, "Socialist Calculation III, the Competitive 'Solution"' in Individualism and the Economic Order, pp. 181—208, and Henry Hazlitt's remarkable essay in fictional form, The Great Idea (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1951). |
EconMises I Ludwig von Mises Die Gemeinwirtschaft Jena 1922 Rothbard II Murray N. Rothbard Classical Economics. An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham 1995 Rothbard III Murray N. Rothbard Man, Economy and State with Power and Market. Study Edition Auburn, Alabama 1962, 1970, 2009 Rothbard IV Murray N. Rothbard The Essential von Mises Auburn, Alabama 1988 Rothbard V Murray N. Rothbard Power and Market: Government and the Economy Kansas City 1977 |
| Socialism | Nietzsche | Höffe I 377 Socialism/Nietzsche/Höffe: NietzscheVsSocialism(1): Its eventual victory, determined as the uprising of those oppressed for millennia, is not a question of right but of power, and likewise not an outflow of justice but of covetousness. The criticism culminates in the assertion that (...) socialism is the "younger brother of the almost extinct despotism," for it desires an abundance of state power that amounts to the "annihilation of the individual". >Politics/Nietzsche, >Society/Nietzsche. 1. F. Nietzsche Ein Blick auf den Staat. In: F. Nietzsche, Menschliches, Allzumenschliches, 1878 |
Nie I Friedrich Nietzsche Sämtliche Werke: Kritische Studienausgabe Berlin 2009 Nie V F. Nietzsche Beyond Good and Evil 2014 Höffe I Otfried Höffe Geschichte des politischen Denkens München 2016 |
| |||
No results. Please choose an author or concept or try a different keyword-search.