tpuiatti

Economics in one Lesson Henry Hazlitt and The Theory of Money and Credit Ludwig von Mises (not as simplified versions of Keynes of course but Austrian School introductions to Macroecon which are IMO clear, simple, and logical)

My personal favourite being Pierre-Simon Laplace as an advocate of causal determinism: "We may regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its past and the cause of its future. An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes." —Pierre Simon Laplace, A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities

UK Debt Slave and Injin have it spot on. Government has completely hypnotised this country (UK) defending their existence using the most abominable tactics of media hysteria and manipulation through fear. In case of the banking crisis, vilifying bankers for making full use of the monetary system with which they were presented. It's lie of all lies that's been force fed to them, I really despair if you can't see that Bill. The Economic Calculation Problem is not an "Austrian Myth" - it's an incredibly simple assertion any form of centralised control is by definition inherently inefficient because only the price mechanism can deliver a resource at Marginal Cost. Indeed free market economics is so elegant because it is devoid of moral implication, it is unique in that it is Positive Economics not Normative. All other models are premised on coercive redistribution of wealth and liberty infringement on the grounds of subjective moral opinion. I find it funny when people attack a theory such as Austrian Economics as "simplistic" or "naive" when it's simplicity is it's beauty. It's almost as if they want it to be more complicated than it is. To try and make a case that a central body can who can, at will, REDEFINE THE SCARCITY of the fundamental medium of wealth exchange and arbitrarily decide the cost of borrowing it is "ok" as long as the public are educated about the monetary system is preposterous beyond belief to me. You can try and confuse the debate all you like with anti-gold rhetoric but fundamental economic principles don't lie. You corrupt the properties of a commodity's scarcity and moreover let a bunch of bureaucrats with ties to big banks do that, it will end in tears. No amount of "education" is gonna change that. Bill, the plutocracy you speak of is a feature of a government model as is oligarchic corporatism. Under an anarchic free market you, by definition, chop out the legs legislative abuse and barriers to market entry. War, inflation, taxation, crime, and general financial slavery are what you thank your "elected government" for. Democracy? Hitler came to power through a democracy. QED.