Economic Schools of thought late 1800's and early 1900's. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 28, 2024, 07:22:34 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Economic Schools of thought late 1800's and early 1900's. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: What theory would you have been a disciple of?
#1
Austrian School/Neoclassicalism
 
#2
German Historical School
 
#3
English Historical School
 
#4
Marxian Economics
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 23

Author Topic: Economic Schools of thought late 1800's and early 1900's.  (Read 12223 times)
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

« on: August 12, 2009, 10:31:18 PM »

Feh, I'm not entirely sure I'm comfortable answering Marxian or German. I'll answer German for the sake of the poll, but I consider myself a Keynesian.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

« Reply #1 on: August 14, 2009, 12:10:09 AM »

I guess after reading some of this more in detail I fall more into the English Historical School than the German Historical School but with some large influence from Marxist(I'm for total equal oppurtunity provided by government if necessary) and even Austrian(I support free trade).
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

« Reply #2 on: August 14, 2009, 06:16:50 PM »

Of the four, Austrian, but I see myself more as a DistributivistThe Austrian school works quite well if your only economic goal is maximizing GDP, but it lacks any consideration of the ethical consequences of doing so.

Respect. Wink

Fail.
I don't see how it is a fail, unless you enjoy the top 0.1% owning huge amounts of your country's wealth while the bottom 50% lives in squalor. There has always been a huge downside in GDP maximization.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

« Reply #3 on: August 14, 2009, 11:47:00 PM »

NOTA

Protectionism+pro-worker freedom (read: anti-union)
What? This doesn't make any sense. Unions are the main institution in this country promoting Protectionism. No other group really solidly is against Protectionism, if you get rid of them you lose your whole support base. A few half-brain dead farmers is all you'll get solidly on your side.

Anyways Protectionism is stupid in most cases.
Logged
War on Want
Evilmexicandictator
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,643
Uzbekistan


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -8.00

« Reply #4 on: August 15, 2009, 01:19:01 AM »

NOTA

Protectionism+pro-worker freedom (read: anti-union)
What? This doesn't make any sense. Unions are the main institution in this country promoting Protectionism. No other group really solidly is against Protectionism, if you get rid of them you lose your whole support base. A few half-brain dead farmers is all you'll get solidly on your side.

Anyways Protectionism is stupid in most cases.

It's a nationalistic approach to a pro-growth attitude aimed at expanding the middle class.
Did I mention nationalism is stupid too? Anyways chances are pro-free traders will be seriously injured once oil prices start to spike high during the next few decades. Globalization should be hampered pretty hard once we start having those problems.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 13 queries.