Politicians proclaim the benefits of small business while on the campaign trail. But when they meet in the seedy halls of Congress, they have no problem doing whatever they can to stifle, regulate, and subdue their progress. Instead of siding with entrepreneurs, these politicians often side with political allies and cronies that helped put them into office.
Just because you’re retired doesn’t mean you have to stop working. Especially now that you have all the time in the world to do what you really want. Entrepreneurs don’t only come out of Silicon Valley. They come from all walks of life, from all different ages. If you’re retired and want to stay active while you relax, then find out the steps you need to take in order to start, manage, and grow your next small business.
Austrian economics does more than tell you what happens when the government disturbs market forces. In the hands of knowledgeable investors and entrepreneurs, it can tell you exactly what to expect from the market. Market behavior depends on how people behave. And how people behave is central to the Austrian perspective.
The U.S. dollar has been the world's reserve currency for almost a century, and already there are signs it may be in decline. But that doesn't mean it's not still valuable. On the contrary... As Chris Mayer explains, there are many reasons the U.S. dollar will remain relevant on the world stage for years to come. Read on...
World War II might have dragged the country out of the Great Depression, but it did so at a great price. Central planning took center stage, and politicans and bureaucrats suddenly knew what was best for America, the economy, and your life. On top of that, they replaced the free market with a new economic system… Creditism.
If you’re good at something should you be penalized so others have a chance at success? Should award winning actors and actresses be barred from future Oscar ceremonies to give other men and women the chance to succeed? Success should always be rewarded and encouraged. But what happens when you have a government that wants to even the playing field and take away the spoils of success. Gregory Bresiger finds out...
Practical people often pooh-pooh fiction reading as a time wasting dalliance, dominated by a Marxist coloring of the world. However, fiction readers were given a scientific reason recently for spending hours absorbing fanciful figments of someone’s imagination.
Argentina is suffering the ravages of government debasement of the currency -- i.e., inflation, the process by which government pays for its ever-increasing debts and bills by simply printing more paper currency. The expanded money supply results in a lower value of everyone’s money, which is reflected in the rising prices of the things that money buys.
When government expansion is allowed to continue unabated or when it casts a heavy regulatory shadow on America’s entrepreneurial spirit, the freedoms that we’ve come to know, and perhaps take for granted, slowly begin to slip away.
Its acceptance is as widespread as its justification is important, for it provides the rationale for the Federal Reserve’s unprecedented monetary expansion since 2008. While critics may dispute the wealth effect’s magnitude, few have challenged its conceptual soundness. Such is the purpose of this article. The wealth effect is but a mantra without merit.
Baron Rothschild, the famous French financier, was once heard to say that he knew of only two men who really understood money -- an obscure clerk in the Bank of France and one of the directors of the Bank of England. “Unfortunately,” he added, “they disagree.”
The new reality of Obamacare’s tax credits has left finance reporters to pen articles warning readers to “take care” when considering a tax credit and providing strategies for how best to “protect yourself.” So what do finance reporters know that the White House doesn’t?
Nihilo ex nihilo fit. Out of nothing, nothing comes. First put forward by ancient Greek philosopher Parmenides in the fifth century B.C., Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine later used this axiom to prove that the universe needed a “first mover” to get things going. Even if the whole thing began with some kind of “Big Bang” moment, it still needed a banger to bang it. Who? God, of course.
Economic theories don’t lend themselves to laboratory testing, so the work of a national appraisal firm is especially enlightening. A new study lends support to the Austrian business cycle theory, which says that the less government is involved, the faster a market will recover.
What positive steps can we take? The energy that is now expended by well intentioned, freedom-seeking individuals on the destructive course of politics can be turned into powerful steps that will have a positive effect on the future. All are moral, right and just. None require aggressing. Consider the following...
The Affordable Care Act creates a new health insurance marketplace (the exchange). But because of the great uncertainty about what buyers will enter the market and who will buy what product, the law creates three vehicles to reduce insurance company risk.
Politicians and bureaucrats are notorious for manufacturing euphemisms -- clever but deceptive substitutes for what they really mean but don’t want to admit. That’s how the phrase “revenue enhancement” entered the vocabulary. Some of our courageous friends in government couldn’t bring themselves to say “tax hike.”
It’s easy to be negative about the U.S. economy these days. Find a glint of silver, and folks come running to point out all of the dark clouds looming about. This, of course, is what we got last week when the monthly jobs report was released from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). Folks pooh-poohed the number of jobs and whining that they’re not enough or that it’s less than a bunch of economists thought that it might be. But you know what? Stuff ’em.
Facts are easy. You can check facts. What supporters of the Affordable Care Act are doing, on the other hand, transcends factual bungling. It’s far more advanced: a warping of reality so debauched it looks like something out of a tale by H.P. Lovecraft.
The east coast and parts of the southern U.S. were to varying degrees paralyzed by blizzards a few weeks ago. The snow as expected rendered the roads treacherous, and in anticipation of slick streets, shoppers flocked to the grocery stores in advance.The rush into grocery stores, and its aftermath, offers worthwhile lessons in economics.First up, […]
The highest form of charity, argued the 12th-century Jewish philosopher Maimonides, is when the help given enables the receiver to become self-sufficient.But our systems of state charity — aka welfare — have too frequently had the opposite effect: They have actually created dependency. It is time to rethink the way we help people.I’m going to […]
Last year was quite the year for Bitcoin. We’ve seen exponential growth in Bitcoin’s exchange rate and extensive coverage in the media. Another phenomenon we have witnessed is the proliferation of alternative cryptocurrencies, five of which we’ve provided below.What all of these cryptocurrencies have in common is that they rely on a decentralized network to […]
President Obama crowed in his State of the Union speech about the economy, even mentioning “a rebounding housing market.” Maybe he was referring to friends in high places, like the seller of Penthouse One in New York, which just closed for $50.9 million, all cash. Millions of mere-mortal homeowners likely wanted to throw something at […]
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is acting in a bipartisan way to cover up the biggest single threat to the bipartisan political alliance that is stripping America of its wealth: the United States Congress.There is no question that the following policy is bipartisan. Democrats and Republicans in Congress are completely agreed that the following information […]
Recent difficulties with implementing the Affordable Care Act have increased opposition to the program. A majority of Americans now oppose it. Problems with the HealthCare.gov website are in all likelihood temporary. However, there are serious long-term problems, particularly considering long-term finance and labor supply issues. Given the mounting difficulties with and growing concerns about the […]
The faces of the Detroit bankruptcy are the thousands of pensioners whose promised benefits are suddenly part of the restructure negotiation. When Motown filed for Chapter 9 last July, the city had $11.5 billion in unsecured liabilities. The vast majority of this was pension and health care benefits owed to retired city employees.The images of […]
“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”As the inequality gap grows, there is an ideological battle unfolding in the West.On the one hand, there are those who think government can fix things. It must do more, tax more, […]
THE GREAT ECONOMIC journalist Henry Hazlitt read Philip Wicksteed’s The Common Sense of Political Economy during the formative period of self-study as an economist and social thinker. He serendipitously picked the book up from the Flatbush, Brooklyn, branch of the New York Public Library as he was attempting to learn more economics to help him with his job at the Wall Street Journal. On his 80th birthday Hazlitt characterized his good fortune in stumbling upon Wicksteed’s The Common Sense by paraphrasing John Keats: “Much have I traveled in the realms of gold, etc. Yet never did I breathe its pure serene. Till I heard Wicksteed speak out loud and bold.”1
Hazlitt would move on from Wicksteed and embark on a lifetime of serious self-education in economics and develop close professional relationships with many leading economic thinkers of the time including Lionel Robbins and F.A. Hayek, and especially close personal and professional connections with Benjamin Anderson and Ludwig von Mises. But Hazlitt still had this special affinity for the book that you are about to read.
Hazlitt is not alone in this regard, as Wicksteed is an economists’ economist, while not being just an economist. The Common Sense reflects this persistent and consistent application of the economic way of thinking — the logic of human choice on the margin and the subjectivity of value and cost as revealed in the choices made in the context of acting. Wicksteed deploys the basics of economics to explain not just the universal applicability of decision making on the margin to all realms of human conduct, but develops a theory of the market process animated by exchange; a theory of factor pricing and the equalization of returns; and a general theory of social cooperation emerging out of the purposive behavior of individuals within the market economy.
I encourage the reader to take notice of Wicksteed’s prefatory quote from Goethe: “We are all doing it; very few of us understand what we are doing.” Wicksteed is about to explain to his readers how in our ordinary lives we continually exhibit the economic theory of decision making and interaction even when we ourselves have no idea what we are doing. “In the ordinary course of our lives,” Wicksteed begins his book, “we constantly consider how our time, our energy, or our money shall be spent.” Living a life without philosophical understanding does not mean that our behavior defies philosophical explanation and scientific examination. Economics, in this sense, is little more than applied common sense. As Frank Knight argued about Wicksteed’s work, the “master-theme is that economic theory is merely a clear working-out of the ‘common-sense’ of the administration of resources, and particularly that the same principle governs the organization of production and consumption.”2 The same principle at work on both sides of the market is the human capacity to strive to realize the biggest bang for the buck, and when played off against one another results in the equalization of returns for effort across all margins. But this isn’t true only in the commercial context. We strive to do this in all our endeavors. Consider the following examples Wicksteed uses to illustrate his point:
Thus the same law holds in intellectual, moral, or spiritual as in material matters. Caesar tells how when surprised by the Nervii he had barely time to harangue his soldiers, obviously implying that the harangue was shorter than usual. He felt that a few moments, even at such a crisis, were well devoted to words of exhortation to his troops; but their value declined at the margin, and the price in delaying the onslaught rapidly rose; so the moment was soon reached when the time could be better spent than in prolonging a moving discourse. In a story of South America, after the war, we are told of a planter who, when warned by his wife in the middle of his prayers that the enemy was at the gate, concluded his devotions with a few brief and earnest petitions, and then set about defending himself. Had he been a formalist those final petitions would never have been uttered at all; but under the circumstances the impulse to prayer, though sincere and urgent, became rapidly less imperative and exacting relatively to the urgency of taking steps for defense, as the successive moments passed.
With a wide assortment of such examples, Wicksteed believes that in the first book of The Common Sense of Political Economy he has established once and for all the fact that in the administration of all our resources, man acts upon the same universal principles: “Our preferences and selections as between two or more alternatives are regulated in every case by the terms on which the alternatives are offered and the supply of the desired things or experiences which we command.”3
What I have talked about so far is what you will read in the coming pages that established Wicksteed as a leading figure in the rise of modern neoclassical economics. But as Robbins notes in his introduction, and Kirzner notes in his essay on Wicksteed as an Austrian economist, Wicksteed’s analysis of how the system achieves equilibrium is different from either Walras/Pareto or Marshall. “Wicksteed’s approach,” Robbins writes, “is by no means the same as Pareto’s. His analysis of the conditions of equilibrium is much less an end in itself, much more a tool with which to explain the tendencies of any given situation.” So readers should focus on how Wicksteed explains the working of economic forces to bring about the equalizations of returns, and not simply the fact of equalization; or prices being nudged until they equal money costs. Wicksteed’s economics is an economics of active human decision makers, adjusting their behavior to one another to realize gains from trade, and thus the gains from social cooperation under the division of labor.
No wonder Hazlitt took such inspiration from Wicksteed’s work, and how these themes would be further elaborated in Mises’s Human Action,4 and then again utilized in Hazlitt’s own The Foundations of Morality.5 One of the core problems with ethical theory is that no two people will find happiness or ultimate purpose in precisely the same way. We cannot resolve this problem by appeal to a deity anymore than we can rely on our moral intuitions. But Hazlitt argues that an answer can be found by focusing on social cooperation under the division of labor. “For each of us,” he argues,
social cooperation is the great means of attaining nearly all our ends. For each of us social cooperation is of course not the ultimate end but a means. It has the great advantage that no unanimity with regard to value judgments is required to make it work. But it is a means so central, so universal, so indispensable to the realization of practically all our other ends, that there is little harm in regard it as an end-in-itself, and even in treating it as if it were the goal of ethics. (1964, p. 36)
The division of labor is the greatest example of social cooperation and massively improves the productive capacity of each of us. For our purposes, what matters for Hazlitt is, what general rules are we to live by, that will enable us to live better together so we can realize the benefits from social cooperation. Those general rules are embedded in the private-property system. “All production, all civilization, rests on recognition of and respect for property rights” (Hazlitt 1964, p. 303). Free enterprise, competition, the division of labor, and wealth creation are not separate institutions, but are all grounded in private-property rights and mutually reinforce one another. Without private property, the gains from social cooperation would go unrealized. The free-enterprise system, Hazlitt points out, can exist only within a framework of law and order and morality. In other words, the free-enterprise system presupposes the acceptance of moral rules of just conduct. But the workings of the free market, the vibrancy of competition, the productivity gains from the division of labor, and the generalized benefits from social cooperation also serve to preserve and promote that morality. “Thus, social cooperation,” Hazlitt argues, “is the essence of morality” (1964, p. 359).
Wicksteed, the Unitarian theologian, agreed with Hazlitt as he wrote, “A man can be neither a saint, nor a lover, nor a poet, unless he has comparatively recently had something to eat.” There is a reality constraint that an economic system must produce a certain level of material wealth; otherwise the interactions between individuals will devolve into a struggle for biological survival. Nature is indeed “red in tooth and claw” and mankind is not uniquely equipped to survive in isolation against nature. By cooperating, however, humans have not only survived, but flourished. Through the evolution of rules of just conduct, and judicious establishment of various formal institutions of governance, human beings have been able to realize the gains from social cooperation.
Economic relations to Wicksteed
constitute a machinery by which men devote their energies to the immediate accomplishment of each other’s purposes in order to secure the ultimate accomplishment of their own, irrespective of what those purposes of their own may be, and therefore irrespective of the egoistic or altruistic nature of the motives which dictate them and which stimulate efforts to accomplish them.6
Wicksteed argues that while it may be intellectually important to distinguish between the economic nexus and other social nexuses of human interaction, in practical life it is impossible to permanently isolate the economic from the non-economic. “We may either ignore motives altogether,” Wicksteed argues later in The Common Sense,
or may recognize all motives that are at work, according to the aspect of the matter with which we are concerned at the moment; but in no case may we pick and choose between the motives we will and motives we will not recognize as affecting economic conditions.
The economic way of thinking applies to man in all walks of life and in all his comings and goings. We each have our purposes and plans. We strive to realize those plans as efficaciously as humanly possible. In so doing, we enter into exchange relationships with individuals whom we will never know, and who will never know us, and yet we engage in mutual cooperation to realize our purposes and plans. This is the foundation for human society. Ludwig von Mises perhaps summed up this basic position best when he argued that “within the frame of social cooperation there can emerge between members of society feelings of sympathy and friendship and a sense of belonging together. These feelings are the source of man’s most delightful and most sublime experiences.” But, Mises argued, these feelings “are not, as some have asserted, the agents that have brought about social relationships. They are fruits of social cooperation, they thrive only within its frame” (Mises 1949, p. 144).
There is more to The Common Sense of Political Economy than I can convey in this foreword. I think the readers of this particular edition will be enticed by the connection to Hazlitt and by implication to Mises, as I have tried to draw out in my brief remarks. But let me end by going back to what I said in the beginning. Wicksteed is an economists’ economist, while not being only an economist. So not only do you get the technical economics of marginal analysis and the beginnings of a process perspective on market theory and the price system, but in wonderful prose you have a full methodological exposition of why economic behavior cannot be artificially separated from other forms of rational action, and the social theoretic foundation for the theory of social cooperation under the division of labor. The Common Sense of Political Economy is, simply put, a masterful work in the history of “mainline” economic and political-economy thought.7
1. Henry Hazlitt, “80th Birthday Talk” (Universidad Francisco Marroquin, November 27, 1974).
2. Frank Knight, “The Common Sense of Political Economy (Wicksteed Reprinted),” Journal of Political Economy 42, no. 5 (1934), reprinted in Knight, On the History and Method of Economics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956): p. 105.
3. In chapter 9 of book 1, Wicksteed restates this principle again when he writes,
The guiding principle of all administration, as we have often seen, is to select between open alternatives as to direct our resources towards the fulfillment of that purpose which, given the terms on which it is open to us, takes the highest place on our scale of preferences. And seeing that the securing of that alternative perpetually lowers its marginal significance, and the neglect of other alternatives raises theirs, we shall always be able to bring our marginal increments of satisfaction into balance with the respective terms on which they are open to us.
Interestingly enough for the reader of an Austrian bent, this equilibrium story is quickly appended by one where an error of judgment is made by the decision maker and thus results in plan revision in future actions.
4. Ludwig von Mises, Human Action (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1949).
5. Henry Hazlitt, The Foundations of Morality (Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand, 1964).
6. Advanced students of political economy might want to consult the outstanding work of David Levy and Sandra Peart, “Common Sense at 100: A Classic of Behavioral Economics” (unpublished manuscript, 2010); and also Mario Rizzo’s recent work on the rationality postulate in economics and behavioral economics.
7. On the importance of “mainline” economic and political-economy thought, as opposed to the “mainstream” of contemporary economic science, see Boettke, Living Economics: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow (Guatemala City, GT: Universidad Francisco Marroquin Press, 2012).