|
|
|
|
|
|
by WalterBright
4534 days ago
|
|
|
> I hadn't heard of cost-push inflation before, and I didn't specialize in macro-economics. Who discredited this theory? Cost-push is described in Reisman's tome "Capitalism" and is shown why it is a false theory starting on pg. 907. > perhaps your professor meant that he believed in free enterprise, but wanted to use the taxation system to make post-tax income much more equal? If so, there is no contradiction. I quoted his exact words, and he did not qualify them. In particular he did not say "more equal", he said "equal". I remember it to this day because I was astonished. |
|
|
I couldn't understand that. One difficulty is that not only do Austrian economists use a different language to describe things, but it seems to be arguing against a traditional Keynesian viewpoint. Right now PhD programs don't teach any traditional Keynsian econ, (undergrad programs teach a bit), they skip straight to neo-Keynsianism, which only keeps a few ideas from the original Keynes (e.g. sticky prices). So I don't really understand what the article is arguing against.
I already gave a description of what I thought the sticky-prices based argument for cost-push inflation was. Can you explain in your own words how this particular argument is refuted?
Re the professor, I guess I'll just chalk that up to a bad professor.