(February 12, 2012 at 5:21 pm)Tiberius Wrote: I don't see how that invalidates my point. I can find people who criticise Keynesian economics, that doesn't mean Keynesian economists don't exist.
It also doesnt mean that the current keynesian system isnt being taken advantage of either.
When you can rule out all other variables, such as misuse, corruption, etc...then, and only then, can you tell if it failed or not.
When you hear of "austrian school" you commonly hear that it has "predictive qualities", yet many money gurus who have suggested it to their clients have caused them to lose money. To top it off Austrian economists reject empirical statistical methods, natural experiments, and constructed experiments as tools applicable to economics, saying that while it is appropriate in the natural sciences where factors can be isolated in laboratory conditions, the actions of humans are too complex for such a treatment because humans are not passive and non-adaptive subjects. As Austrian economist Jeffrey Herbener has noted "there are no statistical characteristics to human behavior. It is purposeful rather than random, and changeable rather than constant".
So which one is it? Does it have accurate predictive powers or is it unpredictable?
