Here is the 3rd section of the “Friedrich Hayek” entry at Wikipedia. Check it, add to it, correct it, or improve it as you consider appropriate:
Student and economist
At the University of Vienna, he earned doctorates in law and political science in 1921 and 1923 respectively, and he also studied philosophy, psychology and economics . . . → Read More: wikipedia: “Friedrich Hayek” Entry, Section 3
by Hansjörg Klausinger. From the Abstract:
This note points to the problems arising from the translations of Hayek’s early German-language writings on monetary theory before 1931. Two issues are emphasised. First, some examples of misleading translations of outdated terminology are provided. Second, it is shown that contemporary as well as more recent translations exhibit the . . . → Read More: lit: “Hayek Translated: Some Words of Caution”
We know that much of Hick’s work was inspired by Hayek:
“I can date my own personal ‘revolution’ rather exactly to May or June 1933. It was like this. It began . . with Hayek. His Prices and Production is one of the influences that can be detected in The Theory of Wages; it could . . . → Read More: econ: From Hayek -> Hicks -> Arrow
The Atlas Foundation is sponsoring a “Sound Money” essay contest. Entries are due in November. Top prize is $5,000.
A contemporary update from Mark Steyn:
The real [psycho-social] bubble [of the politicians] is a consequence of big government. The more the citizenry expect from the state, the more our political class will depend on ever more swollen Gulf Emir-size retinues of staffers hovering at the elbow to steer you from one corner of the . . . → Read More: politicians: “Why The Worst Get To The Top”
Barack Obama and some on his economic team claim to be students of Hayek. But as Université du Québec economist Pierre Lemieux points out, Obama’s new plan to “regulate” the macroeconomy is premised on purely magical thinking where government bureaucrats have an impossible God-like knowledge of market relations, and where bureaucrats and politicians have a . . . → Read More: pierre lemieux: Obama As Student Of Hayek = FAIL
Can someone direct me to a good Hayekian explanation of the inverted yield curve phenomena:
Click to enlarge. ht Mish.
It’s impossible for a market economy to function non-pathologically when the backbone of the system — the communication transmission mechanism of money prices — is constantly short-circuited by an unworkable attempt at central planning. John Cochran explains. Quotable:
A major significant failure of the resurgence of market-oriented policies [since the 1980s] was a failure to . . . → Read More: john cochran: How Centrally Planned Money Caused The Crisis
Got to love this:
Obama proposes to entrust the critical job of “systemic risk regulator” to the Federal Reserve, the very organization that has proven most adept at creating systemic risk. This is like making Keith Richards the head of the DEA.
The whole thing is worth a read.
Can microeconomics explain the current crisis? Steven Horwitz explains how it does in an outstanding explication of microeconomic explanation and its application to our current macroeconomic problems (pdf):
The Austrian approach to macroeconomics can already be seen as being fundamentally microeconomic. What matters for growth is the degree to which microeconomic intertemporal coordination is achieved . . . → Read More: macro: Horwitz on How Microeconomics Explains the Current Crisis
Scott Sumner thinks we are, but Bob Murphy gently explains that this bus won’t arrive until the Keynesians and Chicago economists acknowledge the signal fact that interest rates are prices and capital production has a price sensitive time structure:
the interest rate is a price that allocates investment among projects of different length. It’s not . . . → Read More: macro: Are We All Hayekians Now?
From Robert Samuelson:
In theory, expanding public welfare could offset eroding private welfare. President Obama’s health-care proposal reflects that logic. The trouble is that the public sector also faces enormous cost pressures, driven by an aging population and rising health costs. The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal debt will double as a share of . . . → Read More: america=fail: A Must Read on America’s Future