Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Austrian Economics, a lens on everyday reality -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Aloysius Q. Finnegan who wrote (363)	11/7/2008 12:35:22 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 445

I think most Austrian Economists would argue that a war fought on credit could unleash an evil far greater than any barbarian threat. That evil being inflation. Inflation can be bad, very bad, or utterly devastating. But even the last, hyperinflation, isn't always a greater evil than the barbarian threat. If your the target of a war of extermination than even hyperinflation might be preferable. Sure "a war of extermination" is an extreme case, most wars aren't, but most cases of inflation aren't hyperinflation. Although it is true that if you only modestly increase inflation, you only have the potential for modestly using it as a means to grab resources for the government to contribute to the war effort, so the justification for mildly inflation might be very weak (esp. because its easy to inflate more than you thought you would, either by mistake, or because of a slippery slope where you keep thinking just a little more theft through inflation will get you the resources you need) Would the Austrian Economist even support a nationalist position in a global war? I don't think there would be a unified Austrian position on this. Generally they would probably (and properly) see war as destructive and something to be avoided, but that speaks more to initiating a war than fighting in a war once it starts (rather than say capitulating to the invader, or letting the invader conquer someone else). Austrian economists, would by definition be experts in Austrian economics, and they are likely to have their knowledge of it color their views in other areas, but its not as if every issue is purely economic. Different "AEs" would have different opinions outside of the field (and to a lesser extent different opinions within the field).

To: Aloysius Q. Finnegan who wrote (363)	11/7/2008 12:37:09 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 445

When a government funds their war with a tax, everyone understands what is going on. This is one of the most admirable things LBJ did when he asked Congress to impose a 10% income tax surcharge to pay for the war in Viet Nam. Very unpopular at the time, and necessary. In contrast George W. Bush decided to fund his was in Iraq with debt and tax revenues generated by a real estate bubble. This is dishonest. He knew Americans would not support the war in Iraq if they were asked to pay for it. Taxes let the general population decide if the barbarians are truly at the gate, or if the emergency is merely the leader's vanity. .