1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

The Naïveté of Austrian Economists

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Onion Eater, Aug 10, 2009.

  1. Onion Eater

    Onion Eater Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    8
    In my Critique of Austrian Economics I write:

    Burczak (Socialism after Hayek, p. 122) writes:

    Steve Horwitz writes:

    Horwitz applauds the fact that Burczak “gives great play to the market,” yet he ignores the fundamental inequity of labor-managed firms seizing existing corporations from the capitalists and ruining the shareholders, under the procedure of one person, one vote.

    This is an example of what I meant when I said, “Another reason why Austrians seem naïve is their relentless call for deregulation, which often ignores fundamental inequities.”

    Horwitz is a well-known Austrian and Burczak is the winner of the 2007 Smith Center Annual Prize in Austrian Economics, so I take both men as canonical of the Austrian position.

    Do you agree with Horwitz that the abrogation of property rights entailed in seizing firms from the shareholders and giving them to a democratically-elected labor leader can be ignored as long as the new owner does not ask for any regulation, but is willing to operate (with his stolen property) in an unregulated market?
     
  2. dfy9476837

    dfy9476837 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
Loading...

Share This Page