Avatar de Desconocido

Acerca de Nicolas Cachanosky

Associate Professor of Economics Director - Center for Free Enterprise The University of Texas at El Paso

Nuevo Sitio: El Hub Económico

La experiencia de accedes a series económicas públicas de Argentina es como transitar un intrincado laberinto. El Hub Económico es un nuevo sitio que ofrece un mapa o índice de dónde encontrar información (principalmente) económica de Argentina.

Cuando comencé a seguir la economía Argentina más de cerca me encontré con la necesidad de armar mi propio listado de links a series económicas del país. Motivado por la dificultad, especialmente para los menos familiarizados, de encontrar fácilmente información económica trasladé el «índice de links» al nuevo sitio El Hub Económico.

Los links se encuentran divididos en tres grupos (1) fuentes oficiales, (2) fuentes privadas, y (3) fuentes internacionales. Una cuarta sección posee gráficos que en diversas ocasiones en compartido en las redes y que cada tanto he recibido pedidos para compartir los mismos.

El Hub Económico no guarda ninguna información, sólo provee los links a las fuentes originales. Todos los links son a fuentes abiertas, es decir, de acceso público.

Acceder a El Hub Económico.

WP: What Is So Extreme About Mises’ Extreme Apriorism: Reply to Scott Scheall

In Zanotti and Cachanosky (2016) [SSRN version] we argue that the widespread interpretation that for Mises (and by implication most Austrians) economic science can be carried out without empirical assumptions that are not deduced from what Mises calls praxeology is simply wrong. This interpretation, we argue, has a strong root in Rothbard’s (1957) «In Defense of Extrem Apriorism.» We maintain that Mises himself did not maintain this position.

Scott Scheall argues not only that our setting is irrelevant, but that can also be misleading. He even feels comfortable implying that we are not being objective in our analysis because we are more concerned about defending Mises than actually analyzing the epistemological issue.

In this paper we reply to Scheall’s arguments. Even if the problem that Scheall is dealing with is interesting, it remains a different problem to the one we tackle.

Abstract

We reply to Scott Scheall’s What is so Extreme About Mises’s Extreme Apriorism. We restate the setting of the topic of our paper and we argue that Scheall is not providing a clear distinction between (a) Mises the person and his epistemological position and (b) praxeology and economics. We also clarify misrepresentations of our own positions in Scheall’s treatment of our paper.

Download paper from SSRN.

SMP: The Assymetry of Central Bank Power

Comparto comentario en Sound Money Project sobre lo que es un asimetría en los argumentos a favor de la banca libre en general.

For some time now, a lot of attention has been put on the Federal Reserve’s decision on whether or not to increase the federal funds rate target or to leave it unchanged at its current level. The health of the U.S. economy (and a significant part of the world economy) seems to depend whether or not the FOMC decides to hike the Fed funds target, an overnight rate that U.S. banks charge each other (up to 0.25%.)

When the economy needs to be fixed, it seems that the federal funds rate is enough to do the trick. Investment that depends on long-run interest rates rather than short-run interest rates can be indirectly affected by the very short run interest rates that banks charge each other. This requires one to assume that such short-run interest rates have much more power than one might think as they can have a very real effect on the economy. Otherwise, why would so many central banks around the world target short-term interest rates of one kind or another? An increase by just 0.25% of the federal funds rate can be so powerful that FOMC members often hesitate to raise target rates. It could be too much for the economy.

Seguir leyendo en SMP.

 

WP: Value and Capital: Austrian Capital Theory, Retrospect and Prospect

Último paper co-escrito con Peter Lewin: Value and Capital: Austrian Capital Theory, Retrospect and Prospect. En esta ocasión resumimos contribuciones de nuestros trabajo conjunto con énfasis en una audiencia austriaca. Resaltamos aspectos de la teoría del capital que, creemos, merecen un nuevo foco de atención, especialmente con los aportes que el cálculo financiero puede traer a la economía.

Abstract

The time is right for a reexamination of Austrian capital-theory. We attempt to capture the essence of Carl Menger’s approach to capital, highlighting the important distinction between goods and the valuable services they yield (implying that goods are valuable only because they yield valuable services) and highlighting also the importance of money in facilitating exchange and production and in providing the means to value them. We look at the capital-theory of Böhm-Bawerk and suggest that, in many respects, this was a wrong turn, although it did set in motion valuable efforts to clarify the importance of the heterogeneity of productive-resources and their growing complexity over time. We examine the production-function, micro and macro, and show that it is logically untenable and useless as an instrument for empirical investigation, and that this has been known for decades. Of the Austrians after Menger, only Mises followed Irving Fisher in focusing on valuation. He did so in the context of explaining the importance of calculation. Mises’s approach to capital has been insufficiently understood and appreciated. By way of conclusion we draw from our considerations to provide a research agenda in Austrian capital theory.

Acceder al paper en SSRN.

Roberto Cachanosky: 1945: el desaprovechamiento de un contexto económico favorable

En Argentina, el 17 de octubre se celebra el día de la lealtad peronista. Esta columna de Roberto Cachanosky ofrece un contexto crítico sobre un movimiento tan presente en este país.

Es curioso cómo el peronismo suele hacer alarde de democracia, cuando su fundador, el entonces coronel Juan Domingo Perón, fue un activo miembro del golpe de Estado fascista de 1943 que iba a derrocar al Gobierno de Ramón Castillo. Ya Perón había participado del golpe fascista de 1930 y, por lo tanto, era un golpista fogueado.
Perón utilizó el golpe militar para acumular poder. Recordemos que llegó a ser vicepresidente de facto, ministro de Guerra y secretario de Trabajo, puesto desde el que fue acumulando el apoyo de los sectores de ingresos más bajos con la legislación laboral que fue promulgando.

Seguir leyendo en Infobae.

Call for Papers – Libertas: Segunda Epoca Vol. 2, No. 1

 

Paper submission (peer reviewed) for Vol. 2, No. 1 (Spring 2017) of Libertas: Segunda Epoca  is now open. Libertas: Segunda Epoca accepts submissions in English and Spanish.

Libertas: Segunda Epoca’s aims & scope is an interdisciplinary discussion of classical liberal ideas and principles.

For more information go here.

For editorial contact go here.