[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 »

Tagged with:
 

[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 »

Understanding Economics Series
————————————
Common sense economic lessons for the interested layman. How a free market economy works, from an Austrian School perspective.
————————————
Lesson One: The Basics of Human Action

Starting from the very beginning, founding economic theory on absolutely true axioms and deriving universal economic law from them. Major principles: Human Action, Means & Ends, Goods, Production, Time, Scarcity, Choice, Cost, The Margin

Continue reading »

In Defense of [Austrian] Economics

On 22 July 2009, in economics, by Ryan

“The habit of talking and writing about economic affairs without having probed relentlessly to the bottom of their problems has taken the zest out of public discussions on questions vital to human society and diverted politics into paths that lead directly to the destruction of all civilization…Our contemporaries consider that anything which comes under the heading of Economics…is fair game to the unqualified critic….[E]ven those whose activities have, notoriously, often led to failure and bankruptcy, enjoy a spurious prestige as economists which should at all costs be destroyed…It is time these amateurs were unmasked.” Ludwig von Mises[1]

First Impressions of Economics*

What do you think of when you hear “economics?”  Perhaps you imagine a middle-aged man with thick-rimmed glasses and a Ph.D pointing to graphs and a long list of financial equations.  Or maybe you think it’s just the wicked “science of money.”  Odds are, if you pictured something like that, you’ve got a lot of company.

Economics has a bad reputation – it is mind-numbingly boring, filled with incomprehensible jargon, graphs of a bunch of curved lines, a morass of equations, and it seems the only thing all economists are always concerned with are “the latest numbers.”  The average person is overwhelmed by the complexities, but in addition, they may also feel a hint of universal awe and wonder–The thought that “these things must be incredibly important!” may linger among your distaste.  Of course, we’re all aware that topics like unemployment, wages, and taxes certainly do affect all of us, and we all have some conception, however vague, of the forces of “supply” and “demand.”  We know that these things are important, but due to their seemingly complicated nature, it’s probably best left to those who can comprehend their complexities (and withstand their dullness!). Economics has become applied mathematics, and the economist is merely a glorified statistician.

But it is all a farce, a clever ruse! Economics is both tremendously fascinating and commonsensical so that the average layman can appreciate it!

Continue reading »

Tagged with: