POLITICS - Are you an Austrian?
Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
POLITICS - Are you an Austrian?
Now that our economy is starting to get attention (due to the impending crash - talk about getting worried too late to do anything about it ), you might want to find out what YOU believe. How is the economy put together, how does it work? Find out what school of economics you subscribe to, by taking this test:
http://www.mises.org/quiz.asp
The test is fairly lengthy, but you will know in the end. It'll make you think too. There is a shorter version.
Virtually all politicians are socialists, or at best Keynesians (if they bother to think about the economy at all). Interestingly, socialism has long been vanquished as not being a respectable school of economic thought among economists, and Keynsianism has also lost out since the '80's. Yet our governments operate as if they were still valid.
http://www.mises.org/quiz.asp
The test is fairly lengthy, but you will know in the end. It'll make you think too. There is a shorter version.
Virtually all politicians are socialists, or at best Keynesians (if they bother to think about the economy at all). Interestingly, socialism has long been vanquished as not being a respectable school of economic thought among economists, and Keynsianism has also lost out since the '80's. Yet our governments operate as if they were still valid.
- Rimfire McNutjob
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 3158
- Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:51 pm
- Location: Sanford, FL.
I got a 74.
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for rule by brute force, when the biggest, strongest animals among men were always automatically 'right.' Guns ended that, and social democracy is a hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work."
- L. Neil Smith
- L. Neil Smith
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 27908
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
I got a 93/100 and I stand by the choices where I differed. For example,
This says it was wrong for us to get involved in WWII in Europe. This to me is self-evidently self-defense, proactively. If you don't stem Hitler he will eat you eventually, after he's taken over everywhere else and rests and builds, you aren't the big dog anymore. I doubt Mises would see it that way, but the link doesn't give anything but old quotes. (that I can find anyway)24. What are the economic implications of warfare?
A. Warfare reduces economic welfare by destroying real resources. It can benefit a select few who benefit from military spending on the winning side only. For most consumers and businesses it means drastically reduced prosperity. The only justifiable reason for a war is pure self defense. Austrian answer. http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1189
B. War reduces economic welfare by destroying real resources. It may benefit only a select few from military spending, but could also be important in terms of national goals. If diplomacy fails, the general welfare of society may increase as a result of attaining important national objectives via warfare. Defensive wars are always justified. Offensive wars may be good in some circumstances. Chicago answer
C. Warfare stimulates the economy by increasing demand. While wars appear to be destructive, we generate more wealth by rebuilding the things that wars destroy. This employs idle resources and makes for increased prosperity. Keynesian/Neoclassical answer
D. Warfare exists to increase capitalist profits. As competition forces profit rates for domestic ventures down, capitalists go overseas to collect profits. This leads to conflicts between capitalists in different nations. Nations go to war over such competing imperial claims. Capitalism is the main force behind wars. Warfare will end with the end of Capitalism. Socialist answer
Your answer: B
Chicago answer
For optimal results the answer must be: A
Austrian answer. http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1189
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 27908
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
I also answered "B" on that one - and agree with you - I'm standing by that answer. Stating "(T)he only justifiable reason for a war is pure self defense" is idiotic, as that precludes proactive self-defense which is almost always less costly (treasure and human lives) than waiting for the attack before defending one's self. If someone is pointing a gun at me, I'm going to shoot first if I can and not wait until he pulls the trigger to be sure of his hostile intentions!Idahoser wrote:I got a 93/100 and I stand by the choices where I differed. For example,
This says it was wrong for us to get involved in WWII in Europe. This to me is self-evidently self-defense, proactively. If you don't stem Hitler he will eat you eventually, after he's taken over everywhere else and rests and builds, you aren't the big dog anymore. I doubt Mises would see it that way, but the link doesn't give anything but old quotes. (that I can find anyway)24. What are the economic implications of warfare?
A. Warfare reduces economic welfare by destroying real resources. It can benefit a select few who benefit from military spending on the winning side only. For most consumers and businesses it means drastically reduced prosperity. The only justifiable reason for a war is pure self defense. Austrian answer. http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1189
B. War reduces economic welfare by destroying real resources. It may benefit only a select few from military spending, but could also be important in terms of national goals. If diplomacy fails, the general welfare of society may increase as a result of attaining important national objectives via warfare. Defensive wars are always justified. Offensive wars may be good in some circumstances. Chicago answer
C. Warfare stimulates the economy by increasing demand. While wars appear to be destructive, we generate more wealth by rebuilding the things that wars destroy. This employs idle resources and makes for increased prosperity. Keynesian/Neoclassical answer
D. Warfare exists to increase capitalist profits. As competition forces profit rates for domestic ventures down, capitalists go overseas to collect profits. This leads to conflicts between capitalists in different nations. Nations go to war over such competing imperial claims. Capitalism is the main force behind wars. Warfare will end with the end of Capitalism. Socialist answer
Your answer: B
Chicago answer
For optimal results the answer must be: A
Austrian answer. http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=1189
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 27908
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
Answer "C" is close to the classical "broken windows" argument. In a small town a mischievous boy breaks the window of a baker. The townspeople are all upset over the broken window and mad at the little fellow, when someone points out that this is actually good, because now the baker will hire the services of the glass man to repair the window. The glass man in turn will have money to spend on bread, enriching the baker.
Problem here is this logic does not account for the opportunity costs associated with the money the baker spent repairing the window. He might have decided to buy a suit, thus enriching the tailor. Or a pair of shoes, thus helping the cobbler. He may have invested in his own business, hired another employee, or simply saved the money in a bank earning interest, that was used, in turn, to provide a loan to another businessman to create jobs. The destruction of the window may benefit the glass maker – just as war often helps military contractors and suppliers – but that means the money can not be spent on other things. In the simple case above, the tailor or cobbler go without.
The only way war can create value is for the victor to forcibly take from the vanquished. This is why war has been so popular throughout all human history – because the victor taking from the vanquished is the norm. However, Americans don’t practice this, nor do we charge other countries who we save, thus war is always a net cost to society.
That being said, it is still needed, as the cost of not having a strong military and not being willing to fight proactive wars is much higher!
If war enriched a society, creating jobs and wealth, every time a country went into a recession or depression it would simply launch a war on a weaker neighbor. This is one of many fatal flaws with Keynesian economic theory!
Brain hurts now - too much thinking just after midnight!
Problem here is this logic does not account for the opportunity costs associated with the money the baker spent repairing the window. He might have decided to buy a suit, thus enriching the tailor. Or a pair of shoes, thus helping the cobbler. He may have invested in his own business, hired another employee, or simply saved the money in a bank earning interest, that was used, in turn, to provide a loan to another businessman to create jobs. The destruction of the window may benefit the glass maker – just as war often helps military contractors and suppliers – but that means the money can not be spent on other things. In the simple case above, the tailor or cobbler go without.
The only way war can create value is for the victor to forcibly take from the vanquished. This is why war has been so popular throughout all human history – because the victor taking from the vanquished is the norm. However, Americans don’t practice this, nor do we charge other countries who we save, thus war is always a net cost to society.
That being said, it is still needed, as the cost of not having a strong military and not being willing to fight proactive wars is much higher!
If war enriched a society, creating jobs and wealth, every time a country went into a recession or depression it would simply launch a war on a weaker neighbor. This is one of many fatal flaws with Keynesian economic theory!
Brain hurts now - too much thinking just after midnight!
- AJMD429
- Posting leader...
- Posts: 32240
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
- Location: Hoosierland
- Contact:
I guess I'd better go buy a vintage Mauser - I must be Austrian - 96%!
I took route 'A' instead of 'C' and wound up in Chicago on # 7.
I have to confess an advantage - I have received the e-mail "Mises Newsletter" for several years. The actual issues are short essays on these kinds of topics and are really interesting (way less 'dry' than the quiz). It's free, and actually a fun read.
Here's an example about the Welfare State - http://www.mises.org/story/2888
Why Economists Tend to Oppose Gun Control
http://www.mises.org/story/2562
The Why of Gun Ownership
http://www.mises.org/story/1111
SWAT in Littleton (this one is really good)
http://www.mises.org/story/218
I took route 'A' instead of 'C' and wound up in Chicago on # 7.
I have to confess an advantage - I have received the e-mail "Mises Newsletter" for several years. The actual issues are short essays on these kinds of topics and are really interesting (way less 'dry' than the quiz). It's free, and actually a fun read.
Here's an example about the Welfare State - http://www.mises.org/story/2888
Why Economists Tend to Oppose Gun Control
http://www.mises.org/story/2562
The Why of Gun Ownership
http://www.mises.org/story/1111
SWAT in Littleton (this one is really good)
http://www.mises.org/story/218
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.
Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.
Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 27908
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact: