What is Safnerism?
A background and breakdown of what “Safnerism” is all about. The concepts that I agree with, the labels I disagree with, and my opinions on discussion in general. This is not permanent as new ideas will emerge over time.
Warning: I had some fun with this.
From My Tumblr:
Call this a rant, but it comes with valuable socio-economic lessons.
I’ve been taking some hours at a U-Pick berry farm in my hometown, the same one where I worked all throughout High School. Essentially I sit at the stand, direct customers where they can pick blue/strawberries, and then ring them up when they’re done. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fantastic job, and the people are great generally, but sometimes there are those annoying self-centered customers. We’ve all encountered “that guy” somewhere or other.
…
— ————————————
Common sense economic lessons for the interested layman. How a free market economy works, from an Austrian School perspective.
————————————
Lesson Three: Direct Exchange.
An overview of the possibilities of interpersonal interaction with a specific focus on mutual exchange of goods between individuals. An elaboration of price theory – what are prices, how are they determined, supply & demand analysis, and more analytical tools. A discussion of markets, their allocative efficiency, the benefits of free trade, and how markets are self-correcting. All of this done abstracting away from money and complexities in order to comprehend the nature of exchange and the market – skills to be applied to all future lessons and analyses.
Continue reading »
[This paper was originally written for ECON 3469 - History of Economic Thought, and is my most challenging thesis yet. As with anything in HET, this is conjectural.]
Alfred Marshall, an Austrian Sympathizer in the Cambridge Court?
By Ryan Safner
I. INTRODUCTION
Alfred Marshall, the great founder of neoclassical economics, shared more in common with the Austrian School than is traditionally considered. Austrian economists tend to resent Alfred Marshall as the theorist who subsumed their subjectivist theories into an objective and static model of equilibrium analysis. However, they fail to recognize the connection between Marshall and elements of the Austrian methodological tradition. To be sure, Marshall is clearly no Austrian, but many of his comments on the form and scope of economics mark him as a potential fellow-traveler. The broad range of economic action described by Marshall, and his insistence on practical applications to the real world unites him with Austrian theorists. His descriptive emphasis on the biological-evolutionary nature of the market over physical-static modeling suggests of Austrian methodology. His deep comprehension and subsequent temperance towards mathematical economics also provides hints of Austrianism. Most mainstream economists believe that Marshall had historically captured all the Austrians’ relevant contributions into his work, thus rendering the successive generations of Austrians as unnecessary anachronisms. Such followers, however, fail to appreciate the distinction that Marshall may have seen, between his dynamic economics and the successive body of economics attributed “Marshallian.”
Continue reading »
Malthusian Underconsumptionism as Mere Product of the Times
by Ryan Safner
[This paper was originally written for ECON 3462 - History of Economic Thought]
Reverend Thomas Malthus’ attempts to refute the universality of “Say’s Law of Markets” were largely driven by the rash conditions of war and post-war recession in the UK. Malthus’ underconsumptionist fears, and his more famous population thesis, both come during a coincidently chaotic time in European history – the Napoleonic Wars and the subsequent post-war depression. A sound man of empirics like the good Reverend could find economic misery all across Europe in the early 1800s as a result of these conditions, and consequently would challenge Say’s Law in order to account for this. Malthus’ dismal theories were merely ‘a product of the times:’ in the bad times, during both the inflationary war and the deflationary recession, he contested the Classicals’ pristine assumptions of full employment. In the good times, by the 1820s when Europe had recovered, he simply lost interest in the debate and moved on. Both of Malthus’ unique theories – the “population principle” and the underconsumptionist call for an “unproductive class” can be explained by the empirical history of the chaotic era. The fears of a Malthusian catastrophe – that population would outstrip food production—may have largely been a result of barriers to international trade for wheat between the war-torn European powers. Following the war, amidst a depression, mass unemployment and “redundancy of capital” would prompt his calls for an “unproductive class” to sop up the excess production.
Continue reading »
Paul Krugman’s Fear of Austerity (and Sincerity)
From My Tumblr:
Paul Krugman’s Op-Ed in the New York Times blasts the “conventional wisdom” calling for Austerity measures (reducing national debts & deficits in lieu of complete international bankruptcy) as he looks on “with amazement and horror.”
…
View Full Post