Austrians and Post Keynesians on economic reality: Rejoinder to critics

Abstract

Most economists—old and new classical, old and new Keynesian, and Austrian (as embodied in O'Driscoll and Rizzo's The Economics of Time and Ignorance) postulate an immutable reality unchangeable by any human action (the ergodic hypothesis). They differ only over the amount of information decisionmakers have, in the short run, about this unchanging reality. Keynes and the Post Keynesians provide an axiomatic alternative model that presumes a transmutable economic reality (i.e., it postulates a nonergodic environment). Runde, Torr, Prychitko, and Boehm and Farmer fail to adequately address this dichotomous analysis of reality in responding to my review of O'Driscoll and Rizzo's book.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.