What does Austrian economics offer for people not going into political economics in school?
I’ve always wondered this and find it true with almost every school of thought. If all your focus is on political economics, by the way, what exactly are you going to do but work for the government?
A surefire way to anger socialists.
-Jon
I guess I’m not really separated from political economy, but I suppose I’d say that people from lots of different disciplines need a firm foundation in economics in order to do what they want to do well. That’s certainly true of ethics and political philosophy, especially when you move towards applications.
Well, it tastes great and is less filling.
It teaches you how the world really works, which is useful knowledge.
But I see your point. Political science and economics are largely academic disciplines with very little utility in the private sector. However, I think all people need a basic understanding of economics, just as all people should know basic biology or mathematics.
How many people would support unions if they knew the praxeological impact of their restrictions? In that sense, economics is directly relevant to the real world.
-Jon
The government will hire me if I tell them I read a few Rothbard and Mises books? Not likely.
Austrian economics is a method, not any specific body of knowledge. It grants the skill to analyze social organization.
What you do afterwards is make your own way in life.
Austrian Economics is also a way of thinking about things that will constantly allow a person to think critically and correctly about life at large. Understanding the value of the individual is something that Rand pointed out with her Objectivism and is something that when applied to daily life is one of the most useful tools I have in my arsenal.
Why is it that the state favours neoclassical economcics? Is it merely the fact that the methodology of the Austrian school focuses on the individual?
It produces a lot of highly sophisticated, irrelevant conclusions, allowing the state to appear as though it is a patron for science while at the same time not being threatened by the results.
It can help investors and entrepreneurs make better decisions.
I recall that Rothbard actually wrote something to the effect that there would be far less demand for economists in a free market, as opposed to a statist society. End of EoL, maybe?
I think it’s in the Chapter 22 where has writes that the state needs intellectuals to deceive people about its nature and that intellectuals need the state because there wouldn’t be demand for them in the free market.
If that was a paying job I’m pretty sure you’d be a millionaire.
Yeah, I call it “reaching out”. [:D]
With regard to the question on neoclassical economics, it has to do with its methodology. Rather than come up with theories that have a sound basis, the neoclassical economist can easily reject theories with unwanted conclusions. Economics came about originally as a tool for solving public policy concerns, but a lot of its theorems were not to the liking of the elite. Neoclassical economics, by shirking the axiomatic-deductive method, frees itself of this “limitation”.
-Jon