Opens profile photo
Follow
Per Bylund
@PerBylund
The world needs economic literacy. Aso prof #entrepreneurship . Also with & Books: amazon.com/author/perbylu Tweets my own.
Oklahoma, USAPerBylund.comJoined September 2011

Per Bylund’s Tweets

"A capitalist [i.e., owner of productive capital] is always also virtually an entrepreneur and speculator."
Quote Tweet
Ludwig von Mises on that nonsense that is the "pure" entrepreneur, who when not owning capital can make profits but not suffer losses. (Human Action, p. 254)
Image
Image
2
10
I've responded to you, as requested. I do it in a paper forthcoming in the QJAE. The editors should have contacted you soliciting a response to publish in the journal. But if that's not doable, perhaps you can respond here? My article: qjae.scholasticahq.com/article/77380-
Quote Tweet
Replying to @PerBylund and @cloutron4000
Find the hole in the Wray piece, which says exactly what I have said. It's a historical extension of Tobin's observation. I'll wait. Please cite page numbers and quotes.
1
25
New paper on #MMT, #chartalism, and the #economics of #money. Ungated.
Quote Tweet
New paper: "Is It Money Because It Is Redeemed in Tax Payments? A Response to Kelton and Wray" I analyze @StephanieKelton's and L. Randall Wray's claim that fiat currency has value (and is money) because it is used to pay taxes. Forthcoming in the #QJAE: doi.org/10.35297/qjae.
1
6
Ludwig von Mises on that nonsense that is the "pure" entrepreneur, who when not owning capital can make profits but not suffer losses. (Human Action, p. 254)
Image
Image
1
44
Quote Tweet
Authorities continue to crack down on cash and private transactions globally. India removing the highest-denomination 2000 rupee note from circulation, despite it being worth less than $25 USD. reuters.com/markets/curren
Show this thread
7
A nice companion read to my Kelton/Wray rebuttal in the forthcoming issue of the Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics.
1
16
Show this thread
Plenty of academic articles have led to Twitter debates. But how many Twitter debates have moved their way over to the pages of a peer-reviewed journal?
Quote Tweet
New paper: "Is It Money Because It Is Redeemed in Tax Payments? A Response to Kelton and Wray" I analyze @StephanieKelton's and L. Randall Wray's claim that fiat currency has value (and is money) because it is used to pay taxes. Forthcoming in the #QJAE: doi.org/10.35297/qjae.
4
16
New paper: "Is It Money Because It Is Redeemed in Tax Payments? A Response to Kelton and Wray" I analyze 's and L. Randall Wray's claim that fiat currency has value (and is money) because it is used to pay taxes. Forthcoming in the #QJAE:
17
75
It's confusing how often terms mean very different, if not opposite, things in colloquial language and scholarly discourse. Such as "in theory," which in the former means "hardly/not true" but in the latter suggests it should or must be true given everything that we know...
9
40
Show this thread
My request from the critics of Austrian economic theory is this: let's have a real discussion instead of your projecting your weaknesses onto "Austrians." I've made clear where you must target proper critiques, but nobody seems willing to accept the challenge...
1
65
Show this thread
(2) stating that Austrian economics is "not economics" is embarrassingly ignorant: not only was it one of the original marginalist schools of thought, it was also one of the main streams until the unfortunate formalization/mathematization of the economics discipline.
1
65
Show this thread
(1) to be political (rather than positive) the theory must leave room for value judgments. Austrian economics doesn't: it's purely deductive logic with the theory derived from the action axiom. This means you have two options for critique: an axiomatic error or problematic logic.
3
68
Show this thread
Funny how critics, always from the 'left', dismiss Austrian economics for supposedly being political or even "not economics." If you are to criticize (or dismiss) something you should at least be aware of the basics. Both of the aforementioned "points" are very wide of the mark.
8
196
Show this thread
This is not intended as a jab at anyone, as done appear to think. I am myself an economist and professor, not a professor of economics (although I teach courses also in the economics department).
18
Show this thread
Imagine thinking that #economicgrowth refers to how much more resources are used [wasted] and not how much more valued output they produce--and critique it on that [false] basis...
Quote Tweet
Here is a definition of degrowth that defines the term as growth, just different I guess “different growth” is not as catchy degrowth.info/degrowth
1
34