Seems pretty rational to me. Is there anything this book gets wrong? Also what is some good further literature on economics that's not so entry level.
>>25017026>rational>rational0/10
>>25017026Menger has an entry level book which is supposed to be pretty classicTheory of Money and Credit; Human Action - MisesThe Denationalization of Money - HayekMan, Economy, and State; An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought - RothbardRothbard's got a lot of stuff on history. I like his audio lectures on American economic history. They're on youtube.bunch of other stuff, there's reading lists around (seen one in the archive, didn't save it and can't find it though). check mises.org maybe, they've got free PDFs and audiobooks, hard copies, and a bunch else. essays and stuff.
>>25017144Marx debunked Mises
Any good resources on the history of financial instruments and investing?
>>25017154it does get covered to some extent in BOM
>>25017158What is BOM?
>>25017026Economics for the Thinking Man by Costantino Bresciano-TurroniTheory of Social Economy by Gustav Cassel>>25017154Edward Chancellor - The Price of Time
>>25017184I think it's actually called "Economic Policy for the Thinking Man"
>>25017144Is this a reading list for becoming a globalist bootlicker?
>>25017167it's a novel set in South America, but it covers a lot of these economic questions
>>25017167Something some retard wrote and is shilling all over the board. Ignore it.
>>25017538you probably think i didn't hear that
>>25017147oh so humans are irrational huh?
>>25017144Are Austrians taken seriously in modern mainstream economics? I'd rather learn about the mainstream theories before exploring alternatives
>>25017026Adam Smith"The interest of the dealers, however, in any particular branch of trade or manufactures, is always in some respects different from, and even opposite to, that of the public. To widen the market and to narrow the competition, is always the interest of the dealers. To widen the market may frequently be agreeable enough to the interest of the public; but to narrow the competition must always be against it, and can serve only to enable the dealers, by raising their profits above what they naturally would be, to levy, for their own benefit, an absurd tax upon the rest of their fellow-citizens. The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.Our merchants and masters complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price and lessening the sale of goods. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people."
>>25017732I don't think they're taken seriously in any field related to social sciences
>>25017732taken seriously how? they're still doing what they've been doing to the same outcomes as always. they know this stuff, they just don't care because it benefits them. its not like they're going to have a change of heart and stop defrauding and stealing from everybody. communism's popularity isn't contingent on the logical rigor of its doctrines, people are just sick.starting with modern economics is like starting ethics with The Prince.
It doesn't matter how rational your economic ideas are if they aren't replicated empirically.
>>25017833What empiricial evidence contradicts the theory of this book?
>>25017838Dunno I haven't read it
