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 »
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 »
Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!
(Facts, Fictions, Fallacies)
The biggest spotlight in public policy today, especially due to the dismal economic climate, is the level of employment in the economy. Professional economists and citizens alike eagerly await the latest government statistics on “job growth” or more accurately, job losses. Despite these abundantly clear signals of economic and personal pain, establishment mouthpieces still have the effrontery to proclaim “the recession has passed.”
This claim is all the more ironic, as the siren song of political economy to always increase the amount of jobs in a nation, regardless of climate. Jobs are politically popular – from pork-barrel spending projects that enrich a single district[1], to massive public works programs, the jobs fetish of politicians and mainstream economists knows no bounds. The epitome of this viewpoint was the quip by the king of make-work programs, British economist John Maynard Keynes, who advocated the government in tough times to “pay people to dig holes and fill them back up again.”[2] Bear in mind, lest we forget, “we’re all Keynesians again.”[3] The Keynesian viewpoint manifests itself in the Obama-Geithner-Bernanke triumvirate over economic policy. These views are currently being encapsulated in President Obama’s propaganda campaign for a second new round of fiscal stimulus, known as the “jobs bill” to succeed the dubious $787,000,000,000 stimulus package in 2008.
While there might be a strong empirical correlation between the total number of jobs and total economic output (or their respective growth rates), it does not necessarily imply causation. Sycophantic Keynesians and their devout adherents in Washington make an offering at the jobs-altar with the sacrifice of causal economic laws. It is not the jobs that are the underlying engine of growth in an economy, but the savings and wealth that they produce.
While there are many fallacies in putting “jobs” on a pedestal, this article will deal with two of the most important: First, that jobs are intrinsically more valuable than the income they provide, and that thus everyone must have one; and second, that the free market naturally tends towards less than “full employment” in the long-run (the brunt of the Keynesian onslaught).
Before addressing the specific theoretical problems in the Keynesian system, every citizen in America, knowledgeable or not, should ask themselves one question: “Why should we ever trust the same people who promised us unprecedented prosperity and made an absolute mess of things to provide the solution to the problems they created?”
Understanding Economics Series
————————————
Common sense economic lessons for the interested layman. How a free market economy works, from an Austrian School perspective.
————————————
Lesson Two: Land, Labor, & Capital.
An overview of the process of production, and an analysis of the three factors of production – land, labor, and capital. The definition, importance, and function of each of the factors. Also, an extended example of a single-man economy (Robinson Crusoe) and how the process of production involves the cooperation of land, labor, and capital. Also, the importance of capital accumulation for economic growth and prosperity.
Continue reading »
