[frgtpsswrdlame]

Austrian economics is just an outdated theory. Principles of Economics and Das Kapital were written within about four years of each other and while time was poking holes in Communism it was doing the same to Austrian economics. Here's a good argument against the Austrian school if you're really interested.

http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm

[jazzyk]

So Newton's Laws of Motion are just "an outdated theory" because they were published in 1686?

And, I am sorry, but the paper you quote is just pseudo-intellectual drivel. If I could decipher anything from it, it boiled down to "because there is no such thing as perfect free market, therefore Austrian School is flawed".

Or something like that.

[frgtpsswrdlame]

>So Newton's Laws of Motion are just "an outdated theory" because they were published in 1686?

No, the point is that science has advanced. The laws of motion are true because they've survived scientific critique over a long period of time. Aether isn't true because over time the scientific critiques built up and science moved on with new theories. Austrian economics is aether not the laws of motion.

>If I could decipher anything from it...

If you had trouble deciphering it I would suggest that you not subscribe to any economic school because you just don't know enough to pick.

[jazzyk]

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough".

-- Albert Einstein