IN NY TIMES ON THE OPINION PAGE CALLED THE TWINKIE MANIFEST

lsayre wrote:

jpete wrote:

lsayre wrote:Has an Austrian Economist ever won a Nobel Prize in Economics?

Ludwig von Mises.

http://www.mises.org

Ludwig von Mises should have won a Nobel prize in Economics, but (to my knowledge at least) did not.

You're right. My mistake.

According to Mises' student Murray Rothbard, Hayek's development of Mises' theoretical work on the business cycle later earned Hayek the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (shared with Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises

[
You're right. My mistake.

According to Mises' student Murray Rothbard, Hayek's development of Mises' theoretical work on the business cycle later earned Hayek the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (shared with Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises[/quote]

Come on Jpete! Being the statist that I have been labeled as...I even got that one right!

There's a first time for everything!

jpete wrote:There's a first time for everything!

That will suffice!

Peter Schiff rebuts Krugman, again...

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 25z;_ylv=3

I did some research on this "tax the rich" thing and found the same thing Peter is talking about here. Virtually no one paid those top tax rates so to say that the high rates were the "cause" or even a factor, in the economic prosperity of the 50's is just plain false.

We had a 94% tax rate during the Great Depression and you'll not how well that stimulated the economy. But I guess it didn't matter because there was exactly ONE person affected by it and his name was Rockefeller.

Maybe the economic expansion of the 50's had more to do with the manufacturing ability of England, France, Germany, Italy and Japan being a smoking pile of rubble?

Nah...that can't be it!

Krugman's only god, John Maynard Keynes, wrote in his magnum opus work titled "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money" that if the government was to put paper notes (FRN's, otherwise called Dollars in this country) into glass jars and bury them deep within old abandoned coal mines that were subsequently covered with refuse and trash, and it then let Laissez-faire free market entrepreneurs dig it up, this would be no different from mining for gold. This is the mind of the very "genius" that all of economics worldwide today finds at its very heart. It is a mind in the gutter. It is a mind of pure evil, spite, disdain, and envy, yet our entire Federal Reserve (fiat money) based economic system and our social welfare and political spending ideas and concepts rest upon this mans work.

See section 6 of book 3, chapter 10: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subje ... y/ch10.htm

lsayre wrote:Krugman's only god, John Maynard Keynes, wrote in his magnum opus work titled "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money" that if the government was to put paper notes (FRN's, otherwise called Dollars in this country) into glass jars and bury them deep within old abandoned coal mines that were subsequently covered with refuse and trash, and it then let Laissez-faire free market entrepreneurs dig it up, this would be no different from mining for gold. This is the mind of the very "genius" that all of economics worldwide today finds at its very heart. It is a mind in the gutter. It is a mind of pure evil, spite, disdain, and envy, yet our entire Federal Reserve (fiat money) based economic system and our social welfare and political spending ideas and concepts rest upon this mans work.

See section 6 of book 3, chapter 10: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subje ... y/ch10.htm

Theory? Yes? Tell us a developed country that has utilized the economic/political theory of your choice and been successful! I want to know what libertarian success looks like, where it happened, why it happened and, for good measure, whether we could or should replicate it on a national scale. Why ask this question? Because libertarians are often content to sit on the sidelines and snipe. It's one of the reasons, among many others, that they tend not to get anywhere in political life. So let's think pragmatically. What does a win look like to a libertarian, and where have we seen it? "Live and let live" is an ideal, sadly, reserved for Disney movies (which is kind of ironic, really). It takes money to disseminate valid ideas like libertarianism. Where is it going to come from? Though libertarian stances on some social issues are laudable, the economic ideas of libertarianism are often at best naive, at worst cruel and working directly against the ideas of liberty that its adherents claim to stand for.

LIbertarians don't sit and snipe. They created this country. You deny your own heritage.

They don't win in modern America because the banksters and other hucksters in D.C. don't profit from a truly free market.

because the banksters and other hucksters in D.C. don't profit from a truly free market.

In other words they have to work to get money like everyone else rather then just steal it silently from the ignorant masses.

Kevin