Historian of Economic Thought, Bruce Caldwell's presentation at the INET Inaugural Conference on Hayek, Keynes, the Depression, and the recent crisis.
Jonathan Weinstein, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern U, Fairness and Tax Policy--A Response to Mankiw's Proposed "Just Deserts" (HT Steve from Virginia)
I find Hayek's argument on "regulation" unconvincing (and in fact the whole of his argument as presented by Bruce Caldwell unconvincing). A market system is OF IT'S NATURE regulated. Property rights are a sort of regulation. It is unquestioned that regulation can be done badly or well, and good micro-economics can clarify this.
I also disagree fundamentally with his view that because of "complexity" it is not possible to falsify economic propositions. He needs to look at meteorology or ecology. Progress is difficult, but not impossible.
In fact was comes from this discussion is merely nihilism.
Posted by: reason | 12/16/2010 at 10:11 AM
P.S.
I also think his view of the information problem is fundamentally wrong. I don't disagree with "... knowledge was both dispersed and subjectively-held, the
latter implying that some of what people think they know is wrong.". Absolutely true. But it where he goes with that insight that he loses me. He seems in some ways a man of a time before science and general education. There are ways and means of checking ideas and reducing uncertainty. And price signals, are very often time inconsistant (that is for substantial periods they can move in the wrong direction). In fact, as we have seen, ignoring other information, and concentrating only on price signals is inherently misleading.
But maybe the paper is useful after all. It seems Wicksel is the real villain. Hayek was only following a false trail.
Posted by: reason | 12/16/2010 at 10:21 AM