Debt Crisis Impact in Pittsburgh (insurance, to buy, to live)

[BrianTH]

By the way, in many respects a person who called themselves a "Progressive" in the early 20th Century may be very different from a person who calls themselves a "progressive" today. Like the term "conservative", "progressive" is an inherently relative term.

[soniqV]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

anarchocapitalists are de facto arguing for manorialism. And that is a tough sell, since most people rightly prefer being citizens in a republic to being serfs in a manorial system.

You honestly believe that in the age of information and globalism and technology that we would magically fall back into a feudal system sans government and lose a half a millennium of human development? This is why I said the word anarchy is laughably ambiguous. We're about to see the gov't seize up completely here probably in the next few years, and I'll bet even in a worst-case scenario indentured servitude does not make a comeback. And if it did happen to occur somewhere, you'd see a mass exodus from that area to an area where liberties are better respected. Competition works in economics and it works in social structures as well.

Originally Posted by BrianTH

What you will also find is people pointing out that some of the key premises of Austrian economics have been disproven empirically, and in fact are being disproven yet again in this current crisis.

I'd love to see this hard empirical proof, because I have spent a lot of time searching for it. And usually when people claim to have it, it turns out not to be hard proof at all but just another subjective interpretation of data filtered through the eyes of statists. I grew up as an entitled liberal borderline-socialist and searched desperately for years for a hole in Paul and Rothbard and Mises and so many other's arguments. Eventually I had to accept that my beliefs were built on sand, there was no foundation. It was all about what I wanted society to be with no thought toward human nature and interaction.

I really don't see how you could disprove anything considering core tenets of Austrian economics have not been taken seriously in almost a century. Keynes is the one on the chopping block here, it's his road map we've been following. And as far as I can tell, we are about at the natural conclusion of it. But I always want to consider all the evidence so if you have some magic bullet, I'd love to see it. I'm willing to bet it's not as hard and conclusive as you imply.

[squarian]

Interesting selection of millenarian-evangelical language in that statement - change the proper nouns and it might have been written by Increase Mather.

[DarkWolf]

Cities outside the Northeastern Megapolis will probably suffer the most , while cities like NYC will continue on chugging.....and other nearby cities..... Pittsburgh will struggle for a while along with Cleveland and other small cities....

[soniqV]

Originally Posted by squarian

Interesting selection of millenarian-evangelical language in that statement - change the proper nouns and it might have been written by Increase Mather.

There is no evangelizing here because there is no religion. There is simply predictable human behavior and the desires of every human as an individual. The war was predicted. The housing bubble was predicted. The financial crisis was predicted. The dollar collapse is pretty much the only prediction left. Are you a betting man?

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

Cities outside the Northeastern Megapolis will probably suffer the most , while cities like NYC will continue on chugging.....and other nearby cities..... Pittsburgh will struggle for a while along with Cleveland and other small cities....

Everyone who has something to lose will suffer. And NYC has a lot more to lose than everyone else...

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by soniqV

You honestly believe that in the age of information and globalism and technology that we would magically fall back into a feudal system sans government and lose a half a millennium of human development?

Well, no, because we would never devolve to anarchocapitalism in the first place.

If for some reason you hypothesize we magically got thrown into a state of anarchocapitalism in the first place, I do think we would then immediately go into a manorial period (aka warlord period). Eventually we might then overthrow our lords again and reestablish republics, which might not take long since we would remember our republics and how much we preferred them. This is all assuming whatever magic threw us into anarchocapitalism did not reappear to interfere once again.

And if it did happen to occur somewhere, you'd see a mass exodus from that area to an area where liberties are better respected.

Lots of people would likely not have the means to become refugees, but you are correct that many people would likely flee the United States to some other republic that didn't collapse as you are hypothesizing. But if the magic destroyed all the republics in the world simultaneously, then the mobile people would be forced to choose which of the resulting warlords they wanted to serve under (aside from the few who managed to become warlords themselves).

Competition works in economics and it works in social structures as well.

Again, in many circumstances people don't have the means to choose a different social structure form the one in which they find themselves. And of course wars end up forcing social structures on people involuntarily. So there really isn't now, and has never been, anything like a market for social structures for the vast majority of people in the world.

I'd love to see this hard empirical proof, because I have spent a lot of time searching for it. And usually when people claim to have it, it turns out not to be hard proof at all but just another subjective interpretation of data filtered through the eyes of statists.

In other words, you reject the empirical evidence against various key premises of Austrian economics because you reject the very idea of assessing economic theories with empirical data. That's what makes Austrian economics today a religion, not a science.

But it sounds like you claim to be familiar with the work of Friedman, Tullock, Caplan, and others. If so, please explain to me where you think they go wrong.

[DarkWolf]

Originally Posted by soniqV

There is no evangelizing here because there is no religion. There is simply predictable human behavior and the desires of every human as an individual. The war was predicted. The housing bubble was predicted. The financial crisis was predicted. The dollar collapse is pretty much the only prediction left. Are you a betting man?



Everyone who has something to lose will suffer. And NYC has a lot more to lose than everyone else...

The city slowed but did not tank during the recession....we currently have 28 skyscrapers under construction in NYC and another 20 in the region.

[BrianTH]

By the way, Austrians tend to be in a constant state of predicting disasters. And sometimes there are in fact disasters, and other times not. I'll leave it to each individual whether they think that proves the Austrians are right.

[soniqV]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Lots of people would likely not have the means to become refugees, but you are correct that many people would likely flee the United States to some other republic that didn't collapse as you are hypothesizing. But if the magic destroyed all the republics in the world simultaneously, then the mobile people would be forced to choose which of the resulting warlords they wanted to serve under (aside from the few who managed to become warlords themselves).

LOL, and I am the one being accused as a "millenarian-evangelical." Collapse happens. It is a necessary market function. You spend a little time reorganizing and prosper again. Trying to stave off collapse is what is going to create the dystopia you fear.

Never read Tullock. Friedman and Caplan I am familiar with. Tell you what, I'll point out what I feel are some inconsistencies in the Chicagoan school of thought if you answer my question first. You claimed to have proof that shatters my argument, and then shifted the burden of proof to me without ever addressing your bold original claim.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by soniqV

LOL, and I am the one being accused as a "millenarian-evangelical." Collapse happens. It is a necessary market function. You spend a little time reorganizing and prosper again. Trying to stave off collapse is what is going to create the dystopia you fear.

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Business firms do in fact collapse all the time. Sovereign governments are not firms, and don't collapse all the time. And when sovereign governments do collapse, "reorganization and prosperity" is typically not right around the corner for the relevant society.

You claimed to have proof that shatters my argument, and then shifted the burden of proof to me without ever addressing your bold original claim.

My original claim was this:

"You can find people discussing Austrian economics in schools. What you will also find is people pointing out that some of the key premises of Austrian economics have been disproven empirically, and in fact are being disproven yet again in this current crisis."

I just pointed out some academic economists who have discussed this very subject and made the points I said they made. As you claim to be aware, it is a complex discussion, and frankly not one I anticipate I would find all that interesting in having here, because in my experience it always just gets to the point where the Austrian defender is basically asserting no matter what the data says, his views are a priori correct.

In other words, it is a religion, and there is no sense arguing about religion.