Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
David Friedman is good. The Machinery of Freedom is a classic.
Milton tends to be a kook at times and neoliberalism and the Chicago school of thought breaks down.
I checked it out from the Library when I was still in school, but never got around to actually reading it.
I am aware though that there seems to be a bit of contention between Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism and David Friedman's model. I admit, though I'm not 100% certain as to why other than the deontological vs consequentialist approach.
I have an undergrad in economics and been to three different graduate schools, even though one of them was passing time and I wasn't serious about it. I have a M.A. in economics with additional years at the Ph.D. level.
Nowhere in my studies have my professors elucidated me on Austrian economics.
Keep trolling, champ. You don't mind if I call you champ now on, do you?
Champ, well yes you can. One should always acknowledge one's capabilities. Don't you agree?
Three different graduate schools. Interesting. If no where in your travels and during graduate work and your "years" at the PhD level have you been "elucidated" upon Austrian economics, then my friend you have indeed been cheated. I would certainly go back to your notes, and I would be shocked to see that "NO WHERE" have you been exposed to any Austrian thought.
In my undergraduate degree in economics, I had passing mentions to Austrian economic ideas. When obtaining my M.S. in economics I was exposed to many Austrian economic theories. When completing my PhD in economics 8 years ago I was repeatedly exposed to Austrian ideas and theories, some of which during the course of I had to defend.
So, I say to you again. If you have yet to be exposed to ANY Austrian theoretical ideas, either you've not been paying attention, or you need to find a better institution to pursue your degree into the science of economics.
I only discovered the austrian perspective from further researching libertarianism after reading some of Milton Friedman's books. I have since moved away from Friedman.
I discovered the Austrian theory of economics as well after reading more of Friedman's papers and theories.while pursuing my undergrad doing research and background.
Both were stimulating and interesting at the time.
Champ, well yes you can. One should always acknowledge one's capabilities. Don't you agree?
Three different graduate schools. Interesting. If no where in your travels and during graduate work and your "years" at the PhD level have you been "elucidated" upon Austrian economics, then my friend you have indeed been cheated. I would certainly go back to your notes, and I would be shocked to see that "NO WHERE" have you been exposed to any Austrian thought.
In my undergraduate degree in economics, I had passing mentions to Austrian economic ideas. When obtaining my M.S. in economics I was exposed to many Austrian economic theories. When completing my PhD in economics 8 years ago I was repeatedly exposed to Austrian ideas and theories, some of which during the course of I had to defend.
So, I say to you again. If you have yet to be exposed to ANY Austrian theoretical ideas, either you've not been paying attention, or you need to find a better institution to pursue your degree into the science of economics.
Good luck w/ that.
Sincerely,
Champ
Sure buddy,
That is why you completely deflected from the topic at hand and made it personal.
Honestly, you are one of the reasons I dropped out of my Ph.D. program. If you had a Ph.D., then why are you so distracted by economic argument that you make them personal. You have more of a vendetta against a school of thought that you were marginally exposed than actual arguments.
Why are you so focused on trolling me and falsely attacking argument rather than providing logical and reasonable responses?
I checked it out from the Library when I was still in school, but never got around to actually reading it.
I am aware though that there seems to be a bit of contention between Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism and David Friedman's model. I admit, though I'm not 100% certain as to why other than the deontological vs consequentialist approach.
Friedman's (David) book on Price Theory is (even though I disagree with some of the premises) a good read if you've got time or are interested in Price Theory.
Friedman's (David) book on Price Theory is (even though I disagree with some of the premises) a good read if you've got time or are interested in Price Theory.
That is why you completely deflecting from the topic at hand and made it personal.
Honestly, you are one of the reasons I dropped out of my Ph.D. program. If you had a Ph.D., then why are you so distracted by economic argument that you make them personal. You have more of a vendetta against a school of thought that you were marginally exposed than actual arguments.
Why are you so focused on trolling and me falsely attacking argument, then providing logical and reasonable responses?
Why are you threatened?
Yeah, okay. Sure. You know you're the reason I tend to focus on the more scientific based assumptions in economics, because while it can be a scientific math based study. In it's basis it is a psychological science and those like you tend to attempt to spin and obfuscate issues and topics when they get pinned and blown wide open who obviously have no idea what they speak of. One who makes assumptions (falsely) and w/ out supporting data due to one's own personal experiences (which is another economic topic) and applies them unilaterally to all outlooks and outcomes. Vendetta? Nah, I've just seen it exposed and exposed a school of thought's failings and it's holes too much to rely on a majority of it's premises. I'm sorry if you're instructional education has been lacking and has failed to live up to your expectations. Then again, for 10 years, you kept going back and still were left wanting. What kind of "rational expectation" is that? Oh, wait...you don't agree w/ "rational expectations". Sorry.
focused? nah, just exposing it for what it is. You wanted an argument...I told you I'll be your Huckleberry.
Now I'm just amused. But since I've got to work in my economic job early...I'll have to read what you're gonna weasel out and write till late tomorrow. Please don't disappoint my "expectations"
I checked it out from the Library when I was still in school, but never got around to actually reading it.
I am aware though that there seems to be a bit of contention between Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism and David Friedman's model. I admit, though I'm not 100% certain as to why other than the deontological vs consequentialist approach.
I was unaware of this. David did approach anarchy in a more utilitarian perspective than Rothbard, but David did approach anarchy in a very palpable way that both utilitarians and natural right school could enjoy.
David is right. The natural right school vs the utilitarian school will never be solved. Rothbard was a natural rights advocate and Mises a utilitarian advocate.
Yeah, okay. Sure. You know you're the reason I tend to focus on the more scientific based assumptions in economics, because while it can be a scientific math based study. In it's basis it is a psychological science and those like you tend to attempt to spin and obfuscate issues and topics when they get pinned and blown wide open who obviously have no idea what they speak of. One who makes assumptions (falsely) and w/ out supporting data due to one's own personal experiences (which is another economic topic) and applies them unilaterally to all outlooks and outcomes. Vendetta? Nah, I've just seen it exposed and exposed a school of thought's failings and it's holes too much to rely on a majority of it's premises. I'm sorry if you're instructional education has been lacking and has failed to live up to your expectations. Then again, for 10 years, you kept going back and still were left wanting. What kind of "rational expectation" is that? Oh, wait...you don't agree w/ "rational expectations". Sorry.
Your sorry ass assumptions are not resonating with me.
Quote:
focused? nah, just exposing it for what it is. You wanted an argument...I told you I'll be your Huckleberry.
I never wanted an argument. You just assumed so and failed miserably.
Quote:
Now I'm just amused. But since I've got to work in my economic job early...I'll have to read what you're gonna weasel out and write till late tomorrow. Please don't disappoint my "expectations"
I was unaware of this. David did approach anarchy in a more utilitarian perspective than Rothbard, but David did approach anarchy in a very palpable way that both utilitarians and natural right school could enjoy.
David is right. The natural right school vs the utilitarian school will never be solved. Rothbard was a natural rights advocate and Mises a utilitarian advocate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
