Quote from: Red on August 04, 2010, 06:20:20 PM

I was going to summarize my criticisms of your point of view but wikipedia already did it better.

It is enough to say that I concur.

By the way, just because people put extensive thought into something doesn't imply it is correct. The communists had lots of theories about why that model was better. Empirically, they didn't prove out. Many people saw the consequences of communism as mathematically obvious. That did not make them closed minded.

Communism in theory uses fatally flawed concepts. If ever we are to have communism on this world it will be in the form of vast material wealth that will leave nobody wanting for basic goods. Scarcity (and therefore economics) will always exist up until the point we can create new universes, or something like that. Maybe it will exist even then.
Communism in practice... 'nuff said. In my personal experience, the people I've encountered who support those ideals tend to argue with emotion, dismiss ideas out of hand, and blindly assert facts without backing them up. No wonder the methodology tended to be so violent. Communism is the perverted offspring of folk economics, a dead philosopher's ideals, and the power of the state.

Quote from: Red on August 04, 2010, 06:20:20 PM

For the record, I'm a pragmatic libertarian. Believe but do your own math. Math works. Empirically validated functions rule. Philosophy is easy to twist to any whim. That is my philosophy! :-)

Economics != Philosophy. Austrian economics does not say what ought to be, but it does tell you what happens. Are you a libertarian who's unfamiliar with the Austrian school or were you just joking around? Whether you agree or disagree, I recommend you at least do the research. Go over to the Mises forums, ask your questions there, and then feel free to disagree with the people who respond to you. At least have an open mind about it. Once you read more, you'll also find that there is actually plenty of empirical support for it, as well.

Quote from: Red on August 04, 2010, 06:20:20 PM

-------

Criticism of the Austrian School

...

A copy/paste of something refuting something you admittedly are very unfamiliar with does not a valid criticism make Wink

The criticisms there aren't very strong and misunderstand much of the Austrian School's points, like the whole "unscientific" thing. People who claim that don't really understand what it's about, and "a priori" are used in mathematics and geometry as well.

For the record, I agree with that one criticism that states that Austrians overplay their differences. There is nothing strange or unusual about the Austrian school of economics once you learn what it's all about, except perhaps the name.