What do Austrians think of Victor Aguilar’s critique of Mises and the Austrian school in www.axiomaticeconomics.com ?
They think they should throw up their hands and close down this site.
That first link was hilarious!
The last post he made as “sock puppet”, on the first link, was filled with falaciousness.
He completely misunderstood Robert Murphy’s quote.
Ron Paul is not an economist, but what I think he meant by that quote was that money is valuable AS MONEY, because of objective qualities that make it a good form of currency for people.
His last quote of jeffery tucker and his comments seem absolutely irrelevant.
Normally I get upset at how people on this forum don’t really engage people in debate and instead just dismiss people. But here, that was probably the best course of action, this guy had no idea what he was talking about. He attempted to kill a whole school of economics with one paper, that is a lot to expect from one’s self.
Did Robert Murphy really fail to refute it and so lost $1000???
There is this: Ron Paul Forums: Criticism of Axiomatic Economics
Aguilar was banned for this post so you can comment on axiomatic economics at the first link without worrying about him showing up to defend his theory.
This thread is entirely pointless?
Agnapostate used the “Ion Cannon” software to run a denial-of-service attack on Aguilar’s website, but it didn’t work.
What software are you guys using? Have you had any more success than Agna?
Edit: Never mind.
Never mind what? You were going to tell me what software you are using but then decided not to since it isn’t working? Tell me anyway. Maybe I can help.
BTW Here is a screen print of Agnapostate’s computer running the Ion Cannon software against Aguilar’s site:
I’m banning Lord Voldemort for ban dodging. He is Victor Aguilar or one of his pawns. Also, the Ludwig von Mises Institute does not support any illegal activities, especially ones which the founders of LvMI would consider immoral (e.g. violating others’ private property rights).
Gather round children, I have a story to tell. Once upon a time, in the year two-thousand-and-four, in a far, far away land known as the United States of America, Victor Aguilar submitted a paper to the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. This is what he got back:
Referee Comments:
“Critique of Austrian Economics From 1930 To 1990”
I can in no way recommend publication of this paper. Although purporting
to be a critique of the Austrian tradition since 1930, and while citing a
number of prominent Austrian economists, the paper reveals tremendous
ignorance of the Austrian tradition the author is supposed to be criticizing.
The notion that there was no Austrian tradition before Hayek published
Prices and Production, and that the big split within the tradition occurs
along Menger-Mises vs. Böhm-Bawerk/Hayek lines reveals that the author
knows not of what he is speaking.
The author grossly errs in equating the Austrian tradition itself with
capital theory, thus ignoring the core of Austrian economics: praxeological
price theory. The author further spends an inordinate amount of time
parsing details regarding which direction capital structure triangles lie and
which way arrows on diagrams point. Although these may be important
regarding pedagogy, they hardly define who gets the theory right and who
gets it wrong.
Finally, while making relatively grandiose claims as to the success of
his own axiomatic system as opposed to Mises’, the author merely asserts
that his axioms are right and that Mises’ are wrong. A critique must be
more than a tissue of assertions. It must reasonably demonstrate the problems
of the object of the criticism. In order to provide such a critique, it is
customary to know a reasonable amount of the object in question and to
provide sound reasons for the critique. The author of this paper does neither.
The writing is also way below the standard for acceptance in the
Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. The paper is at times rambling,
at others incoherent, at others unscholarly both in its form and content.
For all of these reasons, this paper does not merit publication in the
QJAE (correspondence from Judith Thommesen, Managing Editor).
No, Victor failed to pay up because his ego was (and still is) too big.
touche