Economics in One Lesson
A million copy seller, Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lessonis a classic economic primer. But it is also much more, having become a fundamental influence on modern "libertarian" economics of the type espoused by Ron Paul and others. Considered among the leading economic thinkers of the "Austrian School," which includes Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich (F.A.) Hayek, and others, Henry Hazlitt (1894-1993), was a libertarian philosopher, an economist, and a journalist. He was the founding vice-president of the Foundation for Economic Education and an early editor of The Freemanmagazine, an influential libertarian publication. Hazlitt wrote Economics in One Lesson, his seminal work, in 1946. Concise and instructive, it is also deceptively prescient and far-reaching in its efforts to dissemble economic fallacies that are so prevalent they have almost become a new orthodoxy. Many current economic commentators across the political spectrum have credited Hazlitt with foreseeing the collapse of the global economy which occurred more than 50 years after the initial publication of Economics in One Lesson. Hazlitt's focus on non-governmental solutions, strong -- and strongly reasoned -- anti-deficit position, and general emphasis on free markets, economic liberty of individuals, and the dangers of government intervention make Economics in One Lesson, every bit as relevant and valuable today as it has been since publication.
Stats for nerds
107recommend
208mentions
147people
2007–2026years
71% recommend23% neutral7% critical
Mentions per year
What Hacker News says
- IMO, this is one of the better takes in this thread. I'm a big fan of Hazlitt's book Economics in One Lesson, which gives a very condensed version of some economic ideas - one of them being automation, with really good examples in the past of labor saving machines like the printing press being created. When I first read it a decade ago I didn't think my profession might be like the printing press, but it's definitely in the crosshairs now.
If I lost my software engineering job tomorrow and was unable to find work within a few months, I have a repurposing plan ready to go. Yes it would be terrible for me economically and I'm sure there would be some sad days, but sometimes bad things happen and we have to make the best of them and move on.
- There's a simple answer in established literature.
There is an objective perspective. You might want to read Hazlitt, Economics in one lesson.
- You are talking in circles while missing the point, and ignoring quite a lot of established literature on economics.
I'd suggest if you are limited on time that you read Hazlitt. Economics in One Lesson. You seem to conflate need for demand in your examples. The two are not the same.
Need includes anyone who could benefit/find valuable from the use of something, the value being derived from productive human action.
Demand in reality includes only the people who would make an actual exchange at a specific price point. The former is a superset of the latter.
You end up misleading others, and going into delusional territory when you ignore this nuance.
- In most terms if you constrain supply price goes up. If you make cheaper to make and get and supply goes up it becomes cheaper. Waving the 'just tax it' flag does not actually make things cheaper or better. It just shifts costs and removes capital from the system. It is the broken window fallacy. If you just spend money on 'this other thing' 'this other great thing will happen'.
To understand that this book shows what doing that sort of thinking does. https://fee.org/ebooks/economics-in-one-lesson/
Getting tax law and pushing things to work are a delicate balance. Recycling is a good example of it. We are paying people money to 'recycle' plastic. When the reality is only 5-10% of plastics can be recycled. There is no magic fix. The basic problem is economics. Plastics are cheaper to use. Because they are a byproduct of something everyone needs. That is not going to change. If you tax it here they can find some other country willing to crack the oil and do it for the cheap way. You have to make other options cheaper. That usually comes thru volume.
- Regarding economics, this has been brought up about automation for many decades now. Humans adapt, adjust and productivity output increases to even higher levels.
Yes, it may harm certain professions, careers and people, but the only option is to accept and adapt. We can talk all day and night about how sad and unfair this is, but unfortunately there is nothing stopping such technological advancements.
Though a little blunt at times, the libertarian economist and journalist Henry Hazlitt talks about this in great detail in his book, Economics in One Lesson, which I highly recommend to anyone no matter what belief system. He also wrote many essays on it, including one I'll share here: https://fee.org/articles/the-curse-of-machinery/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_in_One_Lesson is probably also a good book related to this. It mainly argues against subsidies, minimal basic income, price regulation and gives some good arguments against government inventions in general. As someone with quite different viewpoints regarding these topics it was a very interesting read with very well formed arguments against some held beliefs of mine.
Related
Henry Hazlitt
5 recommend · 6
Basic economics
88 recommend · 156
Man, economy, and state
8 recommend · 14
An Austrian perspective on the history of economic thought
3 recommend · 4
2008–2026
The use of knowledge in society
16 recommend · 40
Applied Economics
5 recommend · 7
