123 said:
I just felt like thanking you for giving us this Ludwing von Mise link, theres plenty of interesting stuff to read on this website.
Unfortunately, you simplified Marx as much as you could. Marx is vast, he has a huge and not so coherent opus, so he cant be written off just like that. I for one know very little about him, but i can tell you such thing as "Marxist discourse" exist, there are many people discussing this stuff on scientific level, i know that. Maybe it is not like that in States, but in Europe, marxism is still vivid. So, to say "Marx" today its not to say communism, or revolution, or material base... etc. It has all changed and accomodated to modern ideas (again more philosopic than economic as far as i know). Many serious people, while not having much illusions, gather around the idea of more just and equal society, recognizing Marx as one of numerous inspirations and sources. "Marx" is just a name of the problem, it has little to do with historical person and him being "wrong". Firthermore, i dont see how on earth some 40s economist can be right and fully relevant today, which seems to be implied in your point about Von Mise. I believe Von Mise as well has been "obliterated" as you said.
Then again, im not sure anyone can be "obliterated" so easily. "Human History, Human Psychology, and Human Action" - these are highly discussable terms, and i dont see how come anyone would be entitled to know what our real nature is like. Thats to be re-interpreted over and over again. Besides, i dont tend to idealize anything with "human" adjective. Theres some pomposity and forced grandeur to it so i dont share such a concept. I know very little about economy, but what i know is that im unhappy and pretty much disillusioned about the whole human thing, so i hope youll understand if not appreciate my skepticism.
Very little has changed in out economic system since the 1940's, other than the size and scope of the 1910's and 20's "Middle way." (Which Keynes supported, and Mises reproached). Some of the mechanisms and technology have change, but the primary functions and elements are the same: Federal Reserve, Fraction Reserve Banking, Partial-fiat and fiat monies, Regulatory resource control boards, cronyism, stock market, money markets, Limited-liability corporartions, command theory of law, etc.
We can understand out nature, quite well, if we take the time. There are behaviors, good and ill, that cross cultural lines, and even show up prior to rational choice making in children. Some are also logical, and have been born out by survey, study, and the market.
Things such as ALL VALUE IS SUBJECTIVE. There is no thing on this planet, that all people at all time value equally. A thirsty man values water more than a drowning man. The Consumer values the money less, than the product they purchased. The Seller values the money more, than the product they sold. If an exchange is set up and the trade is one thing, for the same thing (or thing of equal subjective value) the trade will not occur. Typically both parties to a trade, must gain (however, in a few circumstances, on party to a trade may gain, and the other remain nuetral gain-wise).
The Law of Diminishing marginal utility, the more one has of one thing, the less they value the "last" individual thing. (same things). If I have 50 apples, and loose one, I will value that 1 lost apple less. If I have 49 apples now, and loose one more, I would value that next missing apple, more than the first missing apple.
All Humans are always individuals. Humans have unlimited wants. Humans survival is based on reason and toolmaking. Humans need food, water and shelter. Man is not compelled to act, until he percieves some uneasiness. All action is aimed at making life for the living, less uneasy. All peole value some things with the notion it will improve their state of being, though they may be incorrect because of poor information or application (drug addict. The addict values more, in their current addicted state, the drug, than sobriety, with the idea that the drug is preferable to sobriety (or at least to a state without the drug), even though the drug is a poison and will kill them).
Every act is done by the actor, because the actor thinks there will be a benefit, even if not to themselves, but most often, the benefit is to themselves. Even Mother Teresa gained from her chosen life of poverty and charity, or at least, she thought she would.
Just a few thing all people have in common. (all these assume of course, the person is of sound mental and phyiscal being to make the choice and implement it of their own will. Mental instability or insanity, physical incapablity or disability, can create variations of these ideas, but they are the exception to the rule.)
