Pointing out that something bad happened in 1971 with matching data sets is not inherently libertarian, the information is in itself not libertarian slanted. Even if the presenters interpretation is wrong, it doesn’t mean the data is invalid.
You could say the same thing about a lot of Fox News articles. The data in the article is valid, but the way they interpret it is absolutely not. So maybe don’t use them as a source.
I really shouldn’t have to explain to you why a data set without context beyond “wtf happened in 1971” and a Hayak quote is different than a fox news opinion piece, I want to believe that you’re smart enough to figure that out on your own champ.
I can think of two big changes that happened around then, and both had long-term repercussions:
Nixon Shock
Deunionization
Although these are kinda related too, because you need savings to strike. Credit ratings are a horrifyingly opaque way for corporations to tell us how long we can last.
I don’t see how any of Hayek’s ideas apply here.
If e.g. money was treated like outlined in his “Denationalization of money” the inflation rate would look vastly different, because the supply inflation of the USD couldn’t have been forced the way it was done.
And that supply inflation caused devaluation of the USD and inflation of prices.
I’m not saying that all of the inflation rate has been caused by USD supply inflation, but Hayek might be not so bad, if you look closer.
I mean, Austrian economics barely plays any role in any economy; why blame them for the shortcomings of our current economic schemes?
Libertarian trash. It literally quotes their god Hayek at the end.
Pointing out that something bad happened in 1971 with matching data sets is not inherently libertarian, the information is in itself not libertarian slanted. Even if the presenters interpretation is wrong, it doesn’t mean the data is invalid.
You could say the same thing about a lot of Fox News articles. The data in the article is valid, but the way they interpret it is absolutely not. So maybe don’t use them as a source.
I really shouldn’t have to explain to you why a data set without context beyond “wtf happened in 1971” and a Hayak quote is different than a fox news opinion piece, I want to believe that you’re smart enough to figure that out on your own champ.
Only some of it is libertarian trash. The majority of those graphs could be equally interpreted as the need to move towards a more socialist policy.
I can think of two big changes that happened around then, and both had long-term repercussions:
Although these are kinda related too, because you need savings to strike. Credit ratings are a horrifyingly opaque way for corporations to tell us how long we can last.
Why does your meme use 1971?
You would have to ask Mr. Fred Krueger. Ask it nicely, because I hear he can kill you in your dreams.
I don’t see how any of Hayek’s ideas apply here.
If e.g. money was treated like outlined in his “Denationalization of money” the inflation rate would look vastly different, because the supply inflation of the USD couldn’t have been forced the way it was done.
And that supply inflation caused devaluation of the USD and inflation of prices.
I’m not saying that all of the inflation rate has been caused by USD supply inflation, but Hayek might be not so bad, if you look closer.
I mean, Austrian economics barely plays any role in any economy; why blame them for the shortcomings of our current economic schemes?