home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!caen!uflorida!jfh
- From: jfh@beach.cis.ufl.edu (James F. Hranicky)
- Newsgroups: sci.econ
- Subject: Re: Inflation (was Re: GM Plant Closures Again? Won't Solve the Economic Problems
- Message-ID: <38200@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu>
- Date: 11 Jan 93 02:36:32 GMT
- References: <1992Dec30.015836.12988@samba.oit.unc.edu> <38124@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> <1993Jan4.223300.17373@samba.oit.unc.edu>
- Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu
- Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.
- Lines: 32
- Nntp-Posting-Host: beach.cis.ufl.edu
-
- In article <1993Jan4.223300.17373@samba.oit.unc.edu> Robert.Vienneau@launchpad.unc.edu (Robert Vienneau) writes:
-
- >>I don't know much about Post-Keynesianism, but if it resembles Keynesiansm
- >>at all I would tend to discard it.
- >>
- >>I personally prefer the Austrian school of Economics as espoused by
- >>von Mises, von Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Murray Rothbard, George Reisman,
- >>etc.
- >>
- >>Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)
-
- >If your reading is limited to introductory textbooks and Austrians, I
- >know you will not have encountered an adequate explaination of Keynes.
- >With the exceptions of Hayek, Schumpeter, and the first 2 generations, I
- >have not found Austrians to be particularly competent scholars. In
- >particular, von Mises' Human Action is terrible.
- >
- > Robert Vienneau
-
- Where do the Austrians go wrong?
-
- What is a *good* explanation of Keynesianism?
-
- On the contrary, I have found the Austrians that I have read to be
- quite brilliant. In particular, "Human Action" was amazing in scope, depth
- and logic. It made sense to me...what are your problems with it?
-
- Jim Hranicky (jfh@reef.cis.ufl.edu)
-
-
-
-
-