Archivo del Autor: Nicolas Cachanosky
EPT: Desinflando la (base) caja del Gobierno
Comparto mi nota en Economía Para Todos sobre los ingresos y egresos reales el Gobierno Nacional.
La debilidad de las cuentas públicas del gobierno nacional se encuentra en el centro de los problemas económicos del país. Si el deficit fiscal no fuese un agujero negro que busca absorver todo vía impuetos y emisión monetaria Argentina tendría una economía mucho más sólida y con mejores perspectivas. El resto de los problemas, (cepo cambiario, DJAI, etc.) son medidas que de una manera u otra responden a los “problemas de caja.
Sin corregir por maquillaje contable, desde el 2009 que el estado tiene déficit en las cuentas públicas. Con excepción del 2010 que hubo un superávit de 3.000 millones, los déficits han sido crecientes.
A Conversation with M. Friedman and G. Becker (from Cafe Hayek)
Una interesante conversación entre dos de los más importantes economistas del siglo XX, Milton Friedman y Gary Becker. Posteado por Don Boudreaux en Cafe Hayek.
Discovering the «Lost Papers» (by R. Ebeling)
Richard Ebeling compartiendo su experiencia de encontrar los Lost Papers de Mises.
The Future of Austrian Economics (P. Boettke @ FEE – 2010)
Peter Boettke, en FEE, hablando sobre el futuro de la Escuela Austriaca. Son años muy interesantes para esta tradición de pensamiento económico. Boettke ofrece comentarios muy interesante sobre como avanzan los programas de investigación.
Classical Liberalism and the Quest for World Peace (by Richard Ebeling)
Richard Ebeling ofrece otro interesante artículo de opinión sobre la relación entre el liberaliimo clásico y un mundo pacífico.
For almost a century, since the end of the First World War in 1918, mankind has been in search of international order and global peace through the political method of international organization. However, instead of peace among men, the last one hundred years as seen almost unending wars, great and small. Maybe it is because men have looked for peace from government rather than from a rebirth of the philosophy of individualism and classical liberalism.
Rejoinder to David Gordon
Over at Mises Daily, David Gordon offers a critique of my paper with Gabriel Zanotti, The Epistemological Implications of Machlup’s Interpretation of Mises’s Epistemology. We are certainly grateful for Gordon to take the time to not only read our paper, but also to write his critical remarks. We think, however, that his critique is as well intended as is misplaced. We just don’t hold the position that is target of Gordon’s criticisms. We should clarify a few key misconceptions as well as offer some replies to his arguments.
First, a few clarifications about our paper:
- As we explicitly state in the title of our paper, our work is not about Machlup’s position on epistemology. Our paper is about Machlup’s intepretation of Mises’s apriorism, which may or may not be the same position than the one Machlup holds. Any criticism aimed at Machlup’s own position misses the target.
- The matter of fact is that Rothbard reacts directly and explicitly to Machlup’s interpretation of Mises. There is, then, two of Mises’s students arguing that Mises hold an a priori position, but they differ on how this should be interpreted. We think is fair to put both at the same level of initial plausibility and go back to Mises’s work and see which one of these authors were closer to Mises’s own position (The reasons why we think this history of though exercise is valuable should be clear as we approach the conclusions in the paper.) We focus on Machlup’s paper because it offers a good initial bridge to modern epistemology in Austrian economics (something that we think is needed.) Again, it is not that Machlup’s paper has not received the attention it actually did. And is not Machlup’s own position, but his interpretation of Mises what is the focus of our paper. Little is gained by criticizing Machlup per Machlup.
- No one here, not Rothbard, not Machlup, and certainly not us, question the a priori in Mises epistemology. We are not questioning the certainty of the praxeological axiom.
It is to avoid these confusions that in the introduction we say that «[o]ur argument is not that Machlup’s (1955) presentation is at face value a representation of Mises’s position, but that Mises was not an extreme aprioristic thinker and that Machlup’s work offers a bridge between Mises and Lakatos that has been unexplored.»
A Las 8 (J. Benegas, R. Cachanosky y N. Cachanosky)
El pasado 25 de Marzo grabamos con José Benegas y Roberto Cachanosky una emisión especial de su nuevo proyecto Alas8. En esta ocasión el intercambio fue en torno a mi nota en EPT sobre la columna de Claudio Lozano y su análisis de la economía Argentina.
Dos artículos sobre ciclos
Para los que han seguido nuestros posts sobre ciclos internacionales y el rol de las expectativas en la teoría Mises-Hayek del ciclo, compartimos dos artículos ahora disponibles en journals.
The Effects of U.S. Monetary Policy on Colombia and Panama (2002-2007)
The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance
Expectations in Austrian Business Cycle Theory: Market Share Matters
A note on Bitcoin’s monetary disequilibrium
After the two interviews that Adrian and I did for Semanario Virtud (here and here), the problem of monetary equilibrium became an issue of interest in the comments section. This is a point that we both think it deserved a more specific discussion. Can Bitcoin guarantee monetary equilibrium? And if not, can this problem be solved?
Punto de Vista Economico 