This would have been comment #26 or so on June 29th.
Re: Please send me a couple of pointers that I can use here locally.
Dear Hans,
I do not know what will be the immediate outcome of my endeavor but I think that whatever results I get can be shared with others and then this larger groundswell may be a hopeful sign and harbinger for social change.
http://modelclassicalliberalismcity.blogspot.com/
With warm regards,
Bruce
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
A Mises Blog Comment That Was Lost.
This would have been comment #18 or so on June 27th.
Do Economists Not Predict Correctly?
It depends on your definition of an economist."
The answer is "YES! (they do not predict correctly)" unless you use the definition of an economist given by Ludwig von Mises. Then the answer is "NO!"
Here is the link:
Apolitical Political Commentary!
Non-partisan analysis helps to penetrate the propaganda of politicians.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Do Economists Not Predict Correctly?
It depends on your definition of an economist. And your definition depends on the world as you know it.
If you think economists are people who are employed by the government or by institutions that are dependent on funding from the government (which means most institutions of higher learning!) to interpret economic data then the answer is affirmative. They do not predict correctly.
If you think economists are people who use the empirical methodology as the basis of their statistical examination of the economy, thereby conferring interpretive and interventionist powers on the ego-driven; yes, if you think these are economists then the answer is affirmative. They do not predict correctly.
If these are your definitions of an economist because the world that you know is the pathetically corrupt perspective of a pandering politician then it is true that the economists do not predict correctly.
But these are all distortions of reality. There are economists and there are charlatans. The test of a true economist is subjectivism.
Of course it is true that the charlatans cannot predict correctly. It is the imbecilic politicians and their overlords and the bribed media that think that the charlatans are economists.
However the record is clear and conclusive. The true economists, those using the subjectivist methodology, have been accurately predicting the consequences of the practices of quackery imposed upon the economy by the charlatans (with immodest encouragement coming from the politicians).
No, the economists (who are actually charlatans) do not predict correctly!
Yes, the economists (as defined by Ludwig von Mises) do predict correctly!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/ .
Posted by Divine Economy Consulting.
Do Economists Not Predict Correctly?
It depends on your definition of an economist."
The answer is "YES! (they do not predict correctly)" unless you use the definition of an economist given by Ludwig von Mises. Then the answer is "NO!"
Here is the link:
Apolitical Political Commentary!
Non-partisan analysis helps to penetrate the propaganda of politicians.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Do Economists Not Predict Correctly?
It depends on your definition of an economist. And your definition depends on the world as you know it.
If you think economists are people who are employed by the government or by institutions that are dependent on funding from the government (which means most institutions of higher learning!) to interpret economic data then the answer is affirmative. They do not predict correctly.
If you think economists are people who use the empirical methodology as the basis of their statistical examination of the economy, thereby conferring interpretive and interventionist powers on the ego-driven; yes, if you think these are economists then the answer is affirmative. They do not predict correctly.
If these are your definitions of an economist because the world that you know is the pathetically corrupt perspective of a pandering politician then it is true that the economists do not predict correctly.
But these are all distortions of reality. There are economists and there are charlatans. The test of a true economist is subjectivism.
Of course it is true that the charlatans cannot predict correctly. It is the imbecilic politicians and their overlords and the bribed media that think that the charlatans are economists.
However the record is clear and conclusive. The true economists, those using the subjectivist methodology, have been accurately predicting the consequences of the practices of quackery imposed upon the economy by the charlatans (with immodest encouragement coming from the politicians).
No, the economists (who are actually charlatans) do not predict correctly!
Yes, the economists (as defined by Ludwig von Mises) do predict correctly!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/ .
Posted by Divine Economy Consulting.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
A Daily Dose Comment On Senate's Failing Restaurants That Was Lost.
This would have been comment #14 or so.
These bungling but protected socialists live in their own little world isolated from the oppressed class upon whom this political class parasitizes.
The great beauty of its own self destruction is that it will have to 'privatize' to achieve any efficiency but then it is forced to open itself up to more direct contact with the disenchanted. Will these parasites be safe from the resentment of the parasitized? Will the potential of direct encounters between the oppressor and the oppressed send the socialist/interventionist/politicians into a panic like the mad scurry of cockroaches when the light comes on?
Socialism fails because of what it is and because it is loathsome. Socialism self destructs and also it is destroyed by those who know what it is.
I wonder about what was the parallel event that happened when the socialism of the Soviet Union was on the brink of implosion!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/ .
These bungling but protected socialists live in their own little world isolated from the oppressed class upon whom this political class parasitizes.
The great beauty of its own self destruction is that it will have to 'privatize' to achieve any efficiency but then it is forced to open itself up to more direct contact with the disenchanted. Will these parasites be safe from the resentment of the parasitized? Will the potential of direct encounters between the oppressor and the oppressed send the socialist/interventionist/politicians into a panic like the mad scurry of cockroaches when the light comes on?
Socialism fails because of what it is and because it is loathsome. Socialism self destructs and also it is destroyed by those who know what it is.
I wonder about what was the parallel event that happened when the socialism of the Soviet Union was on the brink of implosion!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com/ .
Monday, June 2, 2008
An Austrian Economics Comment That Was Lost.
This is my commentary and contribution (that was unpublished) to the discussion revolving around the following blog entry: Libertarianism and Cultural Differences
May 30, 2008 7:35 AM by Jeffrey Tucker. It would have been comment #30:
There is no way around it, the condition clearly stated by Guido Hulsmann, "there is nothing the State can do to improve the situation," is correct.
In a recent blog entry I described this in a very similar manner: "The beauty of the philosophy of classical liberalism is the recognition that any politics that creates a State is loathsome."
This is quite the challenge to us (classical liberals) since we have to somehow learn how to merge economics and ethics.
I continued along these lines: "Thus the best system is one that is apolitical which means that the human ego has to be completely removed from the process."
How is that possible?"
That's the "million dollar question." I propose that it is our 'job' and our challenge to answer that question!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com .
May 30, 2008 7:35 AM by Jeffrey Tucker. It would have been comment #30:
There is no way around it, the condition clearly stated by Guido Hulsmann, "there is nothing the State can do to improve the situation," is correct.
In a recent blog entry I described this in a very similar manner: "The beauty of the philosophy of classical liberalism is the recognition that any politics that creates a State is loathsome."
This is quite the challenge to us (classical liberals) since we have to somehow learn how to merge economics and ethics.
I continued along these lines: "Thus the best system is one that is apolitical which means that the human ego has to be completely removed from the process."
How is that possible?"
That's the "million dollar question." I propose that it is our 'job' and our challenge to answer that question!
For more information go to http://www.divineeconomyconsulting.com .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)