Is David Friedman a follower of the Austrian School of Economics? I know his father was the founder of the Chicago School, but I also know David Fiedman is an anarcho-capitalist. Is there a branch of the Chicago School that doesn’t defend the Federal Reserve?
No, he’s absolutely not an Austrian.
There are definitely neoclassical scholars that would topple the Federal Reserve (e.g., David Friedman, Bryan Caplan, Richard H. Timberlake).
Plus, the monetarist school (if that’s what you’re referring to) doesn’t “defend” the Federal Reserve; Milton Friedman wanted to abolish it. He believed, at least, replacing humans with a mechanical rule to be applied annually was a step in the right direction.
I think he’s more of an eclectic. I have yet to find any conclusion of Friedman’s that I very seriously disagree with.
Clayton -
Eclectic? Uhm, no.
His economic methodology is definitely Chicago school / neoclassical.
Yes, DF makes arguments using neoclassical rationality, but at least he’s honest enough to take them to their logical conclusion.
Think about it, most economists use praxeology (even if they don’t call it that way) for things they find obvious (e.g. why minimum wage doesn’t work, all Phd students I know agree without reference to econometric studies), but in their area of research they insist on the empirical method. How convenient.
Why isn’t he an eclectic?
Is that supposed to be the explanation?
Chicago School, he once replied to this issue on these forums.
Since you made the first assertion, how 'bout you explain how he is eclectic?
Weird response. I didn’t ever try to “explain how he is eclectic”. I don’t plan to, either.
Weird response? The burden of proof is on you. You made the first assertion.
Additionally, I clearly know that you “didn’t ever try” to explain how he is eclectic; that’s why I asked you to.
You said he was eclectic, without ever explaining it. I said he wasn’t it, and I qualified that statement. Notice the difference?
I never said that he was eclectic. Are you confusing me with Clayton?
Yes, I was!
My bad: he isn’t eclectic in that his economic methodology is uniform, neoclassical (and his divergences there are still not Austrian–he would prefer Marshall to either Pareto or Kaldor-Hicks efficiency, for example).
Can you recommend what I should start out with, and what I should end up with, to get an understanding of what that “uniform, neoclassical” methodology is?
As in recommendations for reading?
Books, lectures, or whatever. But the most important suggests of course probably will be books.
How exactly are Neoclassical Ancaps different from Austrian Ancaps? Do they have the same conclusions, but a different means of reaching those conclusions?
I. Ryan, I recommend these:
- Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life by David Friedman. This sounds like an easygoing popularization, but there is some serious microeconomics in it. You’ll learn about “indifference curves” and other neoclassical concepts that Austrians shun.
- Economics by Glenn Hubbard and Anthony O’Brien. This is absolutely one of my favorite microeconomics textbooks.
- Law’s Order: What Economics Has to Do with Law and Why It Matters by David Friedman. This presents economics in the context of law; you’ll learn much about both. Preview the back cover just to get a taste of how insightful it is.
- Price Theory: An Intermediate Text by David Friedman. He actually reproduced much of this material in his Hidden Order book, but all the subjects are covered with more depth in this textbook.
Overall, if you’ve been learning about Austrian economics, you’ll more easily transition into these books.
We take certain ideas seriously, like public goods and market failure. Many Austrians outright deny these ideas. But, ultimately, you’re right: different means to the same conclusions, even though many of the steps are similar (I don’t argue with why Austrians reject the minimum wage).
For technical differences, read Bryan Caplan’s Why I am Not an Austrian Economist.
I forgot to also recommend More Sex Is Safer Sex: The Unconventional Wisdom of Economics by Steven Landsburg.