Somalia - Success of Anarchy - Page 30

On July 21 2011 05:35 xarthaz wrote:
zocktol, Government burning money would be better for the economy than spending it. Spending it bids resources to unprofitable government dictated ends, burning the taxed money would raise interest rates and stimulate real savings and investment.

On July 21 2011 05:35 xarthaz wrote:
zocktol, Government burning money would be better for the economy than spending it. Spending it bids resources to unprofitable government dictated ends, burning the taxed money would raise interest rates and stimulate real savings and investment.

On July 21 2011 05:35 xarthaz wrote:
zocktol, Government burning money would be better for the economy than spending it. Spending it bids resources to unprofitable government dictated ends, burning the taxed money would raise interest rates and stimulate real savings and investment.
mcc, rothbard is talking about statements that can be demonstrated. In the paradigm of demonstrated utility, government contribution is indeed zero

On July 21 2011 06:30 DeepElemBlues wrote:
As soon as an Austrian (Schooler, not countryman) starts talking about a priori and irrefutable and praxeology my eyes start to glaze over, because I know it's going to be a jumble of jargon that has been copy-pasted into the poster's mind, that in the end says, "I already figured it out in my head - you're wrong."

The very idea that ideas are not "open to refutation" - i.e. that they must be accepted without examination past checking logical soundness - is not intellectual or even scientific and certainly not a way to discover truth.

The entire school of praxeology is essentially a construct of Mises. It is an odd form of circular logic, where your ideas are perfect because your logic is perfect, your logic is perfect because your premises are perfect, and your premises are perfect because their logic is perfect.

On July 21 2011 06:43 xarthaz wrote:
No Blue's, the premises are perfect because the concept is necessary for perception of world:
All experience concerning human action is conditioned by the praxeo-
logical categories and becomes possible only through their application. If
we had not in our mind the schemes provided by praxeological reasoning,
we should never be in a position to discern and to grasp any action. We would
perceive motions, but neither buying nor selling, nor prices, wage rates,
interest rates, and so on. It is only through the utilization of the praxeological
scheme that we become able to have an experience concerning an act of
buying and selling, but then independently of the fact of whether or not our
senses concomitantly perceive any motions of men and of nonhuman
elements of the external world. Unaided by praxeological knowledge we
would never learn anything about media of exchange. If we approach coins
without such preexisting knowledge, we would see in them only round plates
of metal, nothing more. Experience concerning money requires familiarity
with the praxeological category medium of exchange.
Experience concerning human action differs from that concerning natural
phenomena in that it requires and presupposes praxeological knowledge.
This is why the methods of the natural sciences are inappropriate for the
study of praxeology, economics and history.

On July 21 2011 06:43 xarthaz wrote:
No Blue's, the premises are perfect because the concept is necessary for perception of world:
All experience concerning human action is conditioned by the praxeo-
logical categories and becomes possible only through their application. If
we had not in our mind the schemes provided by praxeological reasoning,
we should never be in a position to discern and to grasp any action. We would
perceive motions, but neither buying nor selling, nor prices, wage rates,
interest rates, and so on. It is only through the utilization of the praxeological
scheme that we become able to have an experience concerning an act of
buying and selling, but then independently of the fact of whether or not our
senses concomitantly perceive any motions of men and of nonhuman
elements of the external world. Unaided by praxeological knowledge we
would never learn anything about media of exchange. If we approach coins
without such preexisting knowledge, we would see in them only round plates
of metal, nothing more. Experience concerning money requires familiarity
with the praxeological category medium of exchange.
Experience concerning human action differs from that concerning natural
phenomena in that it requires and presupposes praxeological knowledge.
This is why the methods of the natural sciences are inappropriate for the
study of praxeology, economics and history.

On July 21 2011 05:46 BestZergOnEast wrote:
What's so bad about deflation? Purchasing power goes up. There's an incentive to save (which, despite the mantra of the media that consumption and consumer spending is the key to prosperity, is a much better measure of economic health). Indeed, a healthy sound monetary system would have gentle deflation (combined with wages that increased!). But the government shouldn't burn or print money. There is no need to adjust the money supply. Any amount of money supply is adequate for any economy. The key isn't to raise interest rates or lower them - it's to allow consumers to set interest rates by the % of their income that they save. Let the market decide.

On July 21 2011 07:19 xarthaz wrote:
Wrong. Bringing the consumer economy largely to a halt as more consumption is forgone is possible. However the higher orders of production boom - as investment increases due to increased savings. That is how economic growth happens!

mcc, The meaning of observable behavior of humans comes from attaching the definition of human action to it. You say it doesnt presuppose action axiom. If that is the case, then it is not perceived in a manner that does suppose action axiom. Yet that is incorrect, as human behavior gets its meaning from being interpreted as being action