With the minimum wage set to increase tomorrow, these videos of Walter Williams are worth considering (HT: Don Boudreaux).
Public Schools:
Minimum Wages and Occupational Licensing:
Welfare:
Cross-Posted at Division of Labour and the Beacon.
Source link: http://blog.mises.org/10334/walter-williams-on-good-intentions/
Walter Williams on Good Intentions
Previous post: Literature Update: Another Outpouring
Next post: Indoctrination in Public Schools: a personal memory
{ 22 comments }
I’m stuck partway on the 3rd one
Very, very good information here, though.
What is Mr. Williams, a Friedmanite? His solution to the problems outlined included government intervention in the form of a negative income tax. Hazlitt wrote about this many years ago:
http://mises.org/daily/2406
Any form of welfare instills in the recipient the idea that sometimes you don’t have to work for money. Hazlitt concludes that we can’t sever the link between effort and rewards without some pretty horrible consequences.
The negative income tax already exists in the form of “refundable” tax credits; however, any increase would still be a once-yearly welfare payment and be less viable as a sole source of income. I’m personally in favor of vouchers; if we’re to have the state paying for schooling at all, we might as well make the money work.
Dr. Williams is indeed a Friedmanite. He wants to abolish the Federal Reserve, but he wants to replace it with a computer (his words), which is exactly what Friedman wanted to do. However, Dr. Williams is still one of my favorite economists, despite not being an Austrian.
I was half hoping that Ron Paul would put Williams as his VP pick on the ticket.
Is it Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell that Walter Block has said many times should get the Nobel prize?
Richie, Williams is a disciple of the Chicago School and if I’m not mistaken I remember him making a statement about replacing the Fed with a computer a la Friedman. However, I found this article http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4471 he wrote concerning inflation around the time Bernanke was appointed. At the end of the article he sounds like an Austrian to me. Maybe he has seen the light. I hope so because he is one of the most entertaining economist I’ve ever listened to. When he used to fill in for Rush Limbaugh was the only time that show was worth listening to.
Good article at capmag, Mark. Thanks for the link. Seeing articles like this make me wonder if there’s a way to resolve differences in theories between monetarists and Austrians. Monetary Disequilibrium Theory comes to mind… Does anyone know if monetarists or Freidmanites have a theory of capital structure?
Walter Williams is great. It was on his website that I first heard of The Independent Institute and the work of Robert Higgs (is there a better writer?), which lead me to here.
Hearing Dr. Williams on the radio was what got me interested in economics and libertarianism in the first place, and started me down the road from being an uneasy quasi-conservative to a proud libertarian. I discovered Hayek via his list of recommended books on his website. He may not be an Austrian, but if not for him, I may never have discovered Austrian economics at all.
“Is it Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell that Walter Block has said many times should get the Nobel prize?”
I would vote for Thomas Sowell personally.
Block and Williams have collaborated on research but I believe it is Sowell whom Block frequently complains should have won a Nobel by now.
It’s Sowell, definitely. Walter Williams is more pop-sci. He’s what Sowell would be if Sowell had a personality.
Some monetarists are okay.
Mark Gentry,
The article was great. He definitely sounded like an Austrian; he did not recommend the computer, for which I was waiting. I heard him suggest replacing the Fed with a computer when he was filling in for Limbaugh, which is the only time I listen to that show.
As for Sowell, I read somewhere that he did not believe the Fed was responsible for the boom. He claims that the housing boom was concentrated only in certain markets, not the entire nation as a whole. I never have heard or read what he believes led to the boom and subsequent bust. In addition, he has become a belligerent warmonger, so I have not read much of his stuff lately.
Richie,
I don’t see how any level headed economist who understands incentives and how fractional reserve banking works can not see that the Fed is the root of the problem. We have to remember Friedman was God to a lot of economists. Just as it’s hard to convert someone from one religion to another it is equally as hard to convert someone who has been taught that Keynesianism or monetarism is the right way. I think with what is surely to unfold there will be no way any serious economist will be able to deny the Fed’s role in all of this. I don’t care how little anyone knows about finance or economics, everyone knows that the government is in charge of the value of our money. When that value is severely diminished the Fed’s con will be exposed not only to economists but to John Q Citizen as well.
As for Sowell, I read Tom Woods’ review of Sowell’s new book and I think he said that he didn’t place enough blame on the Fed. In the following video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OujGN2Iplt0 Sowell is discussing what led to the housing boom and bust on the Glenn Beck Show. At about 3:15 into it the first thing he blames is the Fed’s artificially low interest rate policy. He goes on to blame other things as well.I haven’t read Sowell’s new book, so I don’t necessarily disagree with Woods’ observation.
Like I said before, the Fed’s role can no longer be ignored. Not even by Friedmanites and Supply Siders. Have you seen Art Laffer on TV lately? He sounds like Peter Schiff. Hindsight is 20/20 for these guys. What is sad is that they get on TV more than Schiff just because they are part of the establishment and have bigger resumes.
The winners always write the history books. So I guess the best we can hope for is that Austrian economics wins in the long run and will eventually get to write the true history of economics. That’s a long shot considering how much the truth is suppressed, so I won’t hold my breath.
I’ve read both Woods’ and Sowell’s books on the economic crisis, and let’s just say that Sowell does not emphasize the Fed nearly as much as Woods does. Sowell also focuses more on local regulations which artificially increased the cost of housing dramatically in certain areas. They both hammer pretty hard on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the CRA, etc. Sowell definitely gives more of an impression that the economy would not have eventually melted down, if it weren’t for these bad laws and institutions. Woods gives the impression that the meltdown would have happens anyway, eventually, assuming that the Fed’s monetary policy that was in place continued, but the bad laws and institutions focused the excess money into the housing market, and concentrated and accelerated the effect. Woods’ book is definitely much harder on the fed.
I.P. strikes again. Video #3 on Welfare
This video contains an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG. The audio has been disabled.
Must admit that Friedman turned me into a Austrian. Not out of mean rejection of the Chicago School but of natural progression towards liberty. Gotta start somewhere. Here is a short video where he says “My first preference would be to Abolish the Federal Reserve” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL3FT0O4kYg
I personally think Sowell’s Basic Economics is a good starting point for high schoolers encountering economics for the first time (if they even teach it anymore). Economics in One Lesson would be the natural progression from there. At least that’s how I converted to the Austrian school. Never was a huge fan of Friedman but Williams is fun to listen to and has a colorful personality.
Mark Gentry,
Wow, he sounds extremely Austrian in that one!
To quote Williams:
“Increases in money supply are what constitute inflation, and the general rise in the price level is the result.”
What next, will he use the term ‘malinvestment’?
I asked Williams after an event what he disagreed with Austrians about and he said “mathematics.” He agrees with Austrian business cycle theory, getting rid of the Fed, and going to a gold standard. He is about as sympathetic to the Austrian school as one can be without claiming it. He is friends with several of our own including Thomas DiLorenzo.
Comments on this entry are closed.