"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." -- Friedrich Hayek
But who wants to listen to that, right?
But who wants to listen to that, right?
The newest keynesian variant, modern monetary theory, isn't a "modern" theory of money... it's a theory of modern money systems. These aren't based on gold coinage.
Austrian macro is centred around the idea that interest rates are prices. Some people have a desire to consume now. Others have a desire to consume later, interest rates are the price they negotiate. No second order effects. No money supply. No interest in where money comes from. No money, in fact. Money is just a trade good.
There were two must-do-somethings" that "killed" Austrian economics, outside of dissident goldbug circles: the great depression & WW2. Their answer to "how do we win the war?" was "we can't, not enough money." The same applied to "how do we rebuild europe & japan?"
Meanwhile, post war economists were aware of these theories. Yet, they often observed "non clearing markets" in the form of unemployment in places where Austrian economics reckons there shouldn't exist.
Implement... different story. Actual skepticism is a conundrum... notoriously difficult to adhere to. The tables turn when you need to defend your price theory of business cycles... you need to claim to know things.
This pamphlet is as good an example as any. It claims knowledge of what lies down which path... in a way that sounds quite naive to a modern reader, no different than the peers he was chastising.
Austrians were as loud and involved as anyone in building institutions.
Personally I think all economists should study history and psychology, but they prefer their fancy numbers.