Context and homogenizing

I wanted to expound a bit on one of Dr Boettke’s recent posts which attributed economic calculation as the critical contribution of the Austrian School. In Boettke’s publication on economic calculation he lays out his position in the great homogenization debate which has rifted scholars between allegedly Misesian and Hayekian lines. In addition to the role of economic calculation as a case for homogenizing Mises and Hayek’s contributions on socialist calculation, Dr. Boettke makes an additional point which has gone more unnoticed in the calculation v. knowledge squabbles of the internal Austrian circles. The second case for homogenization that Boettke makes draws on a notion from post-modernism (relax, it’s not without caveat). His point is that to truly understand the message behind an author’s work it is helpful to recognize the context in which he is writing. Boettke says the following succinctly, “Mises wrote to a wider audience and for the ages, Hayek wrote for a particular time and place and to a narrow specialist audience.” Probably more unnoticed is the footnote to this quotations which says the following:

Continue reading

The Quotable Gordon Tullock.

In the fall 2005 semester, I enrolled in Special Topics in Public Choice, taught by Gordon Tullock. Many of my classmates and I continually made note of the mere experiential quality of the course. Just to have the opportunity to say that we had taken a class with Gordon Tullock, was a substantial benefit to taking the class. Tullock was a veritable wealth of historical and insightful knowledge throughout the semester. Aside from taking typical notes of important concepts, dates, and diagrams, I couldn’t help myself from jotting down some of his more caustic and biting remarks. They are reprinted to the best of my recollection below. Please understand that any offensiveness is most likely a result of the phrase being taken out of context. The following phrases were recorded in good fun and entertainment.

Continue reading

People who link to me

If you don’t know about the convenient internet resource, technorati, the world must be passing you by. All you do is plug in your site’s (or any site’s) URL and you can see who has linked to it recently in the blogosphere. So here are the results for:
Austrian Addiction
and
The MISEScreants
I’m posting these links as a way to show thanks for linking to me and a quick easy way to link back.

Some interesting comments on crime.

Steven Levitt at Freakonomics began a discussion on the possibilities that nutrition has implications on crime rates. An interesting read but rightly being presented with kit gloves as the implications just seem overwhelmingly counterintuitive.
On a seperate but related issue Doug MacKenzie at Mises.org takes qualm against Landburg’s proposal to tax security devices which skirt the effects of crime onto third parties rather than promote social value for everyone. I would tend to agree with MacKenzie’s reluctance against Landsburg’s tax proposal, but not necessarily his particular logical arguments. In my mind Landsburg is more unfounded and unecessary than anything. The process that he deems as the spread of externalities is in fact an tendency of the market to lead to more abundant provision of security, a good commonly asserted to suffer from public good sub-optimal provision.

Vincent Ostrom rocks my face off!!!

I recently read Vincent Ostrom’s The Meaning of Democracy and the Vulnerability of Democracies for Pete’s Constitutional Political Economy Class. He wrote up a comment on the Austrian Economists.
I would like to comment on a feature of Vincent Ostrom’s proposed research design for the investigation into political economy. As it has been explained to me the Ostroms (both Vincent and Elinore) assert that the proper structure of intensive education in political economy is one of artisanship over repetitions and reiteration. Graduate students learn best by doing and should view their degree seeking years more as apprenticeships in which they hone the tools and skills of their craft.

Continue reading

Curmudgeons, general no-goodnicks

I’ve been bothered by something lately stemming from applications of welfare theories in economics. Without going into technical explanations of the two welfare theories, I’d like to draw attention to the notion of social value. Some Austrians have asserted that the free market does lead to social benefits. More formally represented, think of person A trading with person B, this claim would state that despite the local nature of persons A and B, who feel direct benefit from this transaction, society benefits as well. An accusation could be made that such claims are committing interpersonal utility comparisons. We have no way of knowing the preferences in regards to benefits or losses inferred by third parties outside of a particular commercial transaction. Surely someone may claim a loss, a curmudgeon if you will. This accusation seems reasonable at first but I really hate the idea of curmudgeons and I’d hate to be promoting such behavior so let me write a little more and see what develops.

Continue reading