Review of Austrian Economics

Today, the term "Austrian economics" is used to designate two very different paradigms.

Review of Competition versus Monopoly: Combines Policy in Perspective by Donald Armstrong

For many years, I have been critical of the Austrian theory of depressions and this led Walter Block to ask me to put my criticisms in print.

Demand calls forth supply in the world of economic journals as much as in the “real” economic world. The proliferation of new journals since World War II has been a function of the increasing number of Ph.D.s and of the acute exigencies of “publish or perish.” But there is another category of new journals more relevant to this one: periodicals that function as a nucleus and a sounding board for schools of economic thought partially or wholly outside the prevailing neoclassical paradigm.

There is no use talking about a return to a gold standard until the US has abolished the deficit in the federal budget and kept it balanced for a couple of years.

From The Review of Austrian Economics Vol. 1, No. 4, 1987.

Discipline after discipline, from literature to political theory to philosophy to history, have been invaded by an arrogant band of hermeneuticians, and now even economics is under assault.

It took seven decades, but most people now accept what Ludwig von Mises explained three quarters of a century ago, namely, that centrally directed socialistic economies cannot succeed in coordinating vast numbers of interrelated decisions, in large part because of the information problem arising from non-market forms of resource allocation (Mises 1920). No amount of input-out- put models generated on vast computers can overcome the problems of directing resources under changing conditions of wants and scar-city.

Dominick T. Armentano Antitrust Reform: Predatory Practices and the Competitive Process Acrobat Distiller 7.0.5 (Windows)