[This paper was originally written for ECON 3499 - Independent Study in Austrian Economics]

Two Theories of the Entrepreneur in Austrian Economics

The role of the entrepreneur is one of the most pivotal elements in the economic theories of the Austrian School.  The entrepreneurial nature of the market cited by Austrians is alone sufficient to distinguish their theories from orthodox economics.  Instead of a set of static equilibrium models with pristine assumptions, the Austrians elucidate an emergent market revolving around the dynamic actions of entrepreneurs in an uncertain environment, a perpetual state of disequilibrium.  Professors Joseph Schumpeter and Israel Kirzner, two of the most prominent entrepreneurial theorists, both agree on the fundamental role of the entrepreneur in the market process, and that economics ought to focus on disequilibrium.  However, they interpret the function and purpose of the entrepreneur in two starkly contrasting ways.  Schumpeter argued that it is a small cluster of entrepreneur-innovators that cause disequilibrium in the market with revolutionary new inventions, and that this unstable process will ultimately morph capitalism out of existence.  Kirzner both incorporates the entrepreneurial nature of the market to a broader range of human action, and takes an optimistic approach, arguing that the entrepreneur instead alleviates disequilibrium and brings the market closer to equilibrium and economic harmony.

Continue reading »

Adam Smith’s Capitalism – Positive or Normative?

by Ryan Safner

[This essay was originally written for ECON 3462 - History of Economic Thought]

Adam Smith’s classic argument for capital accumulation is not a positive analysis of a functional market economy, but instead a strong normative account of his preference for investment over consumption.   While Smith is widely hailed as the father of economic science, it is commonly understood that he vaguely mixed positive descriptions with value judgments.  His magnum opus, The Wealth of Nations, functions as the economist’s bible, written archaically and vaguely enough for economic historians to draw numerous contradictory exegeses.  Many of Smith’s more regrettable or idiosyncratic theories on political economy can be explained by his ethical interjections, which in turn reflect his Presbyterian background.  The most vigorous preference he displays is for frugality and thrift over gluttony and conspicuous consumption.  This ethic puts into perspective his confused labor theory of value, specifically the differentiation between “productive” and “unproductive” labors.  The classical conundrum of the diamond-water paradox that he attempted to grapple with was but a mere illusion spawned by these potent inclinations.  The epitome of this bias is his otherwise inexplicable defense of usury laws which blatantly violates his alleged policy of “lassiez-faire.”  Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations elucidates many truths about the free market economy, but these are unfortunately buried underneath mountains of vagaries and ethical interjections.

Continue reading »

“A man shouldn’t believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself.” -Ferris Bueller’s Day Off

Ever since I first saw Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, which I admit was far too late in my young life, and I heard Ferris say that line in the beginning, I was amazed.  I wrote it down, thinking to myself, how can such a cliche pop-comedy movie possibly espouse such a profoundly philosophical idea?  Regardless, I took the idea to heart.

Labeling is always a hassle.  Words have generally agreed upon definitions through intersubjective consensus, but in the realm of politics and philosophy, words are almost meaningless.  Ask a so-called “conservative” whether he believes in global interventionism:  If he says yes, he might now be a “neoconservative,” if no, he might now be a “paleoconservative.”  Ask a “liberal” if she favors wealth redistribution: If she says yes, she’s likely a “socialist,” if no, she’s might be a “libertarian.”  But of course, all of these people still label themselves “conservatives” and “liberals,” and only a select few will identify with such narrow and nuanced terms as “civil libertarian,” “communitarian,” or “anarchosyndicalist,” even if their views seem to “objectively” (whatever that means) line up with common definitions of them.

For a while now I have styled myself as an “anarchocapitalist,” or ancap for short.  I have come here to repudiate that word, it is a terrible word and I have fallen out of favor with it.  Much of this diatribe will be against the word itself, not necessarily the ideas behind it, which I tend to maintain, though I have broadened the horizons of my beliefs as well as expanded my outlook on things.

Continue reading »

A.R.J. Turgot as Austrian Grandfather

by Ryan Safner

[This essay was originally written for ECON 3462 - History of Economic Thought]

Anne-Robert Jacques Turgot’s brief but brilliant writings on political economy portray him as a major intellectual precursor to the modern Austrian school of economics.  Many of his primitive yet revolutionary insights into the nature of a free market bear striking resemblance to major Austrian tenets.  None is so crucial and so well-developed, however, as his vision of a dynamic and emergent market order.  Turgot’s shining brilliance and foresight into this area illuminates the voids of the sycophantic mercantilists and the comparative statics of the classical school.  This grandiose vision would be lost for a century until it was recovered, quite independently, by the original Austrian, Carl Menger.  If Menger is the father of the Austrian school, Turgot would certainly qualify as the estranged grandfather.  Turgot’s prolific vision of market-based progress can be seen through a proto-Austrian lens based upon two key concepts he elucidated – the great role of the capitalist-entrepreneur and that of time.  Turgot observed that it is the entrepreneur, or “undertaker,” who forecasts future conditions and undertakes a profitable venture in the context of ubiquitous risk and uncertainty.  In particular, it is the capitalist-entrepreneur who forwards the money from his saved capital at a future profit to make such an undertaking possible.  Since entrepreneurial action necessitates present action based on future speculation, Turgot is one of the first to highlight the immensely important and often neglected role of time in production and investment.  Their combination makes for an economy where entrepreneurs act as the great equibrilators to the constant flux of market dynamics.  Their actions, as well as their accumulation of capital, allow for the optimistic possibility of an ever-progressing society.

Continue reading »

Tagged with:
 

A brief overview of what “anarchocapitalism” means. Here’s a link to a more lengthy discussion of anarchism (in the anarchocapitalist mindset): http://ryansafner.com/essays/all-about-anarchism/ A brief overview of what “anarchocapitalism” means.

[My apologies for posting this very late.  I had actually made and uploaded these videos to Youtube on January 2nd!

Continue reading »