Total Posts:84|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Are You an Austrian Quiz? (Mises)

Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 10:52:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Basically, it is a quiz on your economic beliefs by the Ludwig von Mises Institute.
---The Mises Institute is somewhat like a think tank. It is libertarian and a proponent of the Austrian School of Economics.

http://mises.org...

My score was 64/100. Which means that I am a 64% follower of the Austrian School of Economics.

---4 of my answers were Austrian
---4 of my answers were Chicago
---1 of my answers was Historical School (there is no distinctly Keynesian answer to this question)
---1 of my answers was Keynesian/Neoclassical

*There is a 25 question quiz here:
http://mises.org...
-But the 10 question quiz was long enough for me...
s0m31john
Posts: 1,879
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 11:11:41 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Your score is: 90/100

1) Austrian answer
2) Austrian answer
3) Chicago answer
4) Chicago answer
5) The Austrian answer
6) Austrian answer
7) Austrian answer
8) Austrian answer
9) Austrian answer
10) Austrian answer

Not sure how anyone could score low, unless they hate freedom.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 11:33:47 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
My score: 38/100

1. Keynesian/Neo-classical
2. Historical school
3. Keynesian
4. Chicago
5. Chicago
6. Chicago
7. Keynesian/Neo-classic
8. Chicago
9. Chicago
10. Chicago

Should I move to Illinois?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 12:23:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
No, you shouldn't, it's called the Chicago school cause that's where the scholars were, not the politicians (e.g., to some extent each, Reagan, Thatcher, Pinochet) who tried to implement it. Illinois politically is one of the most Keynesian joints around.

Your score is: 95/100
I disputed a few elements of most answers, especially the source of valuation where the Austrian acceptance of the intrinsicism/subjectivism dichotomy is most clear (which is why I didn't get 100), but...
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 4:35:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I believe I am, though I may be Chicago. And the quiz doesn't appear to offer Marxian answers. There is a Marxian School, too...
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 5:17:52 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
80/100
1. Property: Austrian
2. Economic Science Approach- Austrian
3. Interest- Chicago
4. Saving- Austrian
5. Economic Value- Socialist
6. Money- Austrian
7. Business Cycle- Austrian
8. Economic Growth- Austrian
9. Monopolies- Chicago
10. Equality- Austrian

It is odd that the Smithian view of natural economic value being labour is considered socialist. However, upon re-examination, there were several correct answers and all those were only half right.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 7:17:03 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Most people who uphold the labour theory of value are socialists, Wjm.

A wall punched to bits is a great deal of labour, but very little value except from the socialist "The purpose of business is to provide jobs and nothing more" line.

And anyone who is an out-and-out Marxist already knows they aren't an Austrian.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 7:52:41 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/26/2009 7:17:03 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Most people who uphold the labour theory of value are socialists, Wjm.

A wall punched to bits is a great deal of labour, but very little value except from the socialist "The purpose of business is to provide jobs and nothing more" line.

And anyone who is an out-and-out Marxist already knows they aren't an Austrian.

The market value of labour is the value of the produce that the labour produces. The produce of that labour is cheaper or greater based on a number of factors, and naturally, between two products of equal demand, the one that requires the most labour or the most difficult labour to be produced will cost more.

I do not believe that labour is the sole cause of economic value, if anything demand is), but labour is the root of value.

And if a company wanted to destroy a wall, they wouldn't have it punched to bits.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 8:04:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
The company is selling HANDMADE destroyed walls. ^_^. Unfortunately, they lack customers.

If something is the root, nothing else can be the sole or a superior cause.

And what, do you think, is the root of demand? ^_^
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2009 8:40:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/26/2009 8:19:33 PM, feverish wrote:
What the hell are you lunatic conservatives talking about?

Warning: comment posted while inebriated.

Libertarianism =/= Conservatism
---A common misconception of the common folk...

---Anyway, your socialist. Socialism has never worked. Conservatism has, while libertarianism hasn't had a real chance.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 5:46:10 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/26/2009 8:40:06 PM, Nags wrote:
At 6/26/2009 8:19:33 PM, feverish wrote:
What the hell are you lunatic conservatives talking about?

Warning: comment posted while inebriated.

Libertarianism =/= Conservatism
---A common misconception of the common folk...

---Anyway, your socialist. Socialism has never worked. Conservatism has, while libertarianism hasn't had a real chance.

To say "socialism" has never worked is incorrect. Maybe when you find a pure and utter form of it, or something similar to the USSR, you'll find it doesn't work, kind of like pure conservatism, or libertarianism. But, socialism when combined correctly with fiscal responsibility and other ideologies, will thrive as is evident in Canada, most of Europe, several successful* African countries, etc.

*Successful here meaning 'country with fairly stable government and GDP.'
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 7:55:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/26/2009 8:04:06 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The company is selling HANDMADE destroyed walls. ^_^. Unfortunately, they lack customers.

If something requires labour, but it not in demand, then it has no value.

If something is the root, nothing else can be the sole or a superior cause.

If something is in demand but requires no labour to produce, then it has no value. Think air. :-)

And what, do you think, is the root of demand? ^_^

Market Surplus.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Again, both demand and labour are both significant variables in the economic value of a product. No answer had both, so I just closed my eyes and picked one.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 9:05:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
something similar to the USSR, you'll find it doesn't work, kind of like pure conservatism, or libertarianism

Hey hey hey. Being completely untested is not "kind of like" being tested and failing utterly.

But, socialism when combined correctly with fiscal responsibility and other ideologies
will thrive as is evident in Canada, most of Europe, several successful* African countries, etc.
You're calling Europe fiscally responsible? Maybe if your yardstick is the United States, which has already learned far too much fiscal irresponsibility from Europe :).

As for the other ideologies, when you have socialism and capitalism in constant struggle with each other, it's called Keynesianism, and it's practiced very nearly the world over, so you can't really consider countries like that "successful" compared to anything but countries like North Korea.

If something is in demand but requires no labour to produce, then it has no value. Think air. :-)
Air does have value, however, simply try moving in the absence of it. It might be valid to say it does not have monetary value (unless, of course, we are speaking of packaged air, which does).

Market Surplus.
Woah, I think you're confusing interpersonal economic modelling with valuation in general. Say's law creates the full economic package version of demand, the "demand" that really means "Want PLUS purchasing power," but that has no meaning for an isolated individual-- who still has to engage in valuation. Something cannot be present in the absence of it's root. The root of valuation ultimately is what it does for you when "consumed" or otherwise used, demand and labor are solely relevant to secondary values in economics.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 9:17:23 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 9:05:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If something is in demand but requires no labour to produce, then it has no value. Think air. :-)
Air does have value, however, simply try moving in the absence of it. It might be valid to say it does not have monetary value (unless, of course, we are speaking of packaged air, which does).

Packaged air has value because it requires labour to produce. Again, if no one wants it, it is worthless.

Market Surplus.
Woah, I think you're confusing interpersonal economic modelling with valuation in general. Say's law creates the full economic package version of demand, the "demand" that really means "Want PLUS purchasing power," but that has no meaning for an isolated individual-- who still has to engage in valuation. Something cannot be present in the absence of it's root. The root of valuation ultimately is what it does for you when "consumed" or otherwise used, demand and labor are solely relevant to secondary values in economics.

"Aggregate Demand" (purchasing power) originates from market surplus.

Aggregate Demand, Demand, and Labour are all factors in determining economic value.
-If one wants a product and has the capital to obtain it, but nothing is required to produce it, then there is no reason to spend capital on it.
-If one wants a product and something is required to produce it but one has not the capital to obtain it, then there might as well be no demand at all, as the product cannot be bought.
-If one has the capital to pruchase something and it took effort to produce it, but thee is no want for it, then it is still worthless.

This reliance on aggregate demand on price contributes to price inflation and deflation.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 11:13:33 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 9:05:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Hey hey hey. Being completely untested is not "kind of like" being tested and failing utterly.

The point is that extremism on either side of the spectrum, left or right, won't work perfectly. The key is finding a balance that will suit the needs of the economy.

You're calling Europe fiscally responsible? Maybe if your yardstick is the United States, which has already learned far too much fiscal irresponsibility from Europe :).

Yes, I do call Europe fiscally responsible. Not all countries in that little continent are, but considering that they have managed their finances relatively well, they're responsible enough. Canada, while not European, is a shining example of Keynesian policy keeping a country fiscally sound, up until we had our lovely neo-conservative government come to power in 2006.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 11:22:02 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 11:13:33 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/27/2009 9:05:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Hey hey hey. Being completely untested is not "kind of like" being tested and failing utterly.

The point is that extremism on either side of the spectrum, left or right, won't work perfectly. The key is finding a balance that will suit the needs of the economy.
The unsupported point


You're calling Europe fiscally responsible? Maybe if your yardstick is the United States, which has already learned far too much fiscal irresponsibility from Europe :).

Yes, I do call Europe fiscally responsible. Not all countries in that little continent are, but considering that they have managed their finances relatively well, they're responsible enough. Canada, while not European, is a shining example of Keynesian policy keeping a country fiscally sound, up until we had our lovely neo-conservative government come to power in 2006.
Keynes was explicitly against "fiscal soundness" you know. Anything fiscally sound about Canada is by definition a motion away from Keynes toward a more capitalist society :).

And neo-conservatives are Keynesian. Neo-conservatism refers to old leftists who acquired a conservative foreign policy, without any compunction about state interference in the economy.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 11:31:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 11:22:02 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The unsupported point

I don't think it is entirely unsupported, but you have a point. Set up a tiny libertarian nation and we'll see the results.

Keynes was explicitly against "fiscal soundness" you know. Anything fiscally sound about Canada is by definition a motion away from Keynes toward a more capitalist society :).

Canada isn't explicitly Keynesian, but it has some aspects. Canada isn't explicitly capitalist either, but it has some aspects, probably more where it counts. Our governments have generally practiced a mixture of many economic systems, and we've come out better than the United States in a lot of cases.

And neo-conservatives are Keynesian. Neo-conservatism refers to old leftists who acquired a conservative foreign policy, without any compunction about state interference in the economy.

Ah, really? I must be getting my terms mixed up. Terms seem to switch around these days, and I'm guessing that while "neo-conservative" means what you say it means, it was taken to mean "neo-liberal" or explicit free market ideology because of Bush's reign (Republicans = social conservatives, must be economic neo-conservatives, etc.). Though I suppose Republicans are neo-conservatives in a sense, at least in their last couple of years. Sorry for the mistake.
LB628
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 11:56:19 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I scored 55/100

1: Keynesian/Neoclassical
2: No distinct Keynesian answer/Historical school
3:Keynesian
4: Austrian
5: Austrian
6: Chicago
7: Keynesian/Neoclassical
8: Austrian
9: Keynesian/Neoclassical
10: Austrian
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 12:45:41 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Anyone who would interpret neoconservative as free market because of Bush has no idea what free market means :)
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 1:00:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 12:45:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Anyone who would interpret neoconservative as free market because of Bush has no idea what free market means :)

Agreed. Neoconservatism is far from protecting the free market.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 1:29:17 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 12:45:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Anyone who would interpret neoconservative as free market because of Bush has no idea what free market means :)

No, they have no idea what neoconservative means. I think they understand full-well what the 'free market' means, or should mean.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 2:32:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 2:13:33 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Isn't the "Third Way" Neo-Keynesian?

"The Third Way rejects both socialism and laissez-faire approaches to economic governance, but chiefly stresses technological development, education, and competitive mechanisms to pursue economic progress and governmental objectives.[8] One of its central aims is to protect the modern welfare state through reforms that maintain its economic integrity."

http://en.wikipedia.org...

You could describe it as that, I guess.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2009 7:18:40 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/27/2009 1:29:17 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/27/2009 12:45:41 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Anyone who would interpret neoconservative as free market because of Bush has no idea what free market means :)

No, they have no idea what neoconservative means. I think they understand full-well what the 'free market' means, or should mean.

Key phrase: Because of Bush.

Unless they are from wayyyy abroad and have no idea what Bush's policies were of course.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
s0m31john
Posts: 1,879
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2009 1:32:04 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Are you an Austrian?

Quiz:

1) Were you born in Austria?
-Yes (1 point)
-No (0 point)

Calculate results:
1+ point(s) - Yes, you are an Austrian.
0 points - No, you are not an Austrian.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2009 6:41:43 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 6/28/2009 1:32:04 AM, s0m31john wrote:
Are you an Austrian?

Quiz:

1) Were you born in Austria?
-Yes (1 point)
-No (0 point)

Calculate results:
1+ point(s) - Yes, you are an Austrian.
0 points - No, you are not an Austrian.

Lol.

Maybe you should include Austro-Hungary in there as well.
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2010 8:36:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I took the 25 question quiz and got them all right.

"Your score is: 100/100"

You guys need to read more Rothbard.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran