An Austrian Critique of Mainstream Economics | Walter Block

[@dirtyharrycat6639]

SIR WALTER BLOCK Knight of Liberty Thank you once again!

[@jean.chevalier]

Great presenter.

[@Biggnuncio]

I'd like to see that article mentioned at the end regarding pollution lawsuits.

[@mikemcdonald9155]

If everyone could only understand Austrian Economics, our troubles would be over.

[@andrebarros7703]

kinda. :D

[@murat9268]

No. But it will be better.

[@johnludtke4416]

The thing is, it's easier to understand than any other...from what I've seen anyway

[@wille5263]

If everyone could understand Austrian Economics, no one would subscribe to a such a pseudo-scientific school of thought.

[@austroknave2886]

@@wille5263 what is pseudo scientific about it

[@LATIFAHMOHDNOR-zy1mq]

Page 199 AUSTRIA (pop. 7,067,432) formally applied for an associate membership in the European Economic Community (EEC or Common Market) on July 28.

[@LATIFAHMOHDNOR-zy1mq]

Russian reminded Austria that it was barred from full membership in the Common Market by its 1955 declaration of permanent neutrality.

[@thefredkalis]

What I love about Walter block that he is funny

[@ahmedbellankas2549]

It seems that walter argument against indifference works only if action is equated with preference,but is that true: Suppose a person s is quadrepelgic and s strictly prefers a to b, then s strictly prefers a to b and s can't demonstrate that by action. If such an argument holds,then the case against indifference falls.

[@newthirx4311]

... people are not quadrepelgic.

[@jonnyy4088]

'Nonsense on stilts'

[@alanforrester]

jonnyy40 do you have a link to a refutation of the claims made in the video?

[@harrisonburge3592]

The nonsense emanated from the mainstream, neoclassical "economists" prior to the 2008 financial crisis, as it has with every Fed manipulated boom for the last century. The record is clear that while the Austrians correctly described the unsustainable boom and predicted the bust, Bernanke, Paulson, and the rest of the clueless Keynesians got sucker punched. Here's just one article as proof of the "nonsense" of Austrian economists: www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2008/09/alert-money-growth-plunges-to-18.html

[@danieltemelkovski9828]

I don't think he was calling Block's points nonsense. At about 20:45 Block called some mainstream claim "nonsense on..." and was searching for the word "stilts." Surprisingly, no one in the audience could help him out.

[@harrisonburge3592]

You're correct. My bad. I added that comment before getting to the "nonsense on stilts" portion.

[@MBarberfan4life]

Jeremy Bentham

[@5herwood]

block is one of the more listenable Austrians.

[@alistairproductions]

Was this in the morning he looks a little tired

[@eze2576]

Still on his game though

[@shirafudee]

Block asserts that sexual harassment “that takes place between secretary and her boss is not a coercive action.” He argues that “if pinching and sexual molestation are outlawed in private places, this violates the rights of those who voluntarily wish to engage in such practice.” Block argues that the proof of the "voluntary" nature of such an act in a private place is that “the person endangered” (the victim woman) “has no claim [right] whatsoever to the private place in question.”[26]

[@BobanOrlovic]

Praxeology is not synthetic a-priori. Synthetic a-priori has to do with the structure of consciousness, praxeology is psychology, basically aposteriori causation.

[@austroknave2886]

Praxeology is not psychology, praxeology is a body of understanding based on a priori deductions and categories of action

[@BobanOrlovic]

@@austroknave2886 That's wrong, mises was a bad philosopher

[@austroknave2886]

@@BobanOrlovic it's true lol it's not psychology

[@BobanOrlovic]

@@austroknave2886 It is psychology, how could it possibly be apriori synthetic? He was just copying kantian jargon to appeal to the people around him in austria

[@wiskybiskits]

@@BobanOrlovic it’s been very well established that praxeology is not psychological, while it explains market phenomena in terms of individual purposefulness, it does not seek to identify the motivations, thoughts, and the ends that give rise to particular purposes and choices, which prevents the categorial distinction of “economic” and “non economic” action, as well as prohibits the judgment on the appropriateness of individual choices. something more suited to psychology and a similar framework would be best understood in hayeks “the sensory order”, while it does focus heavy on psychology and psycho physiology, it is still separate from praxeology as an a priori fundamental law.