5 votes

Max Keiser yet again bashing the Austrian School

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Did Max and Tom ever work

Did Max and Tom ever work things out? Tom really took offense to the stuff Max said and wrote a pretty detailed rebuttal to Max's comments.

RT has a much better show

Agree 100 pct

That show has some of the best guest and ms Lyster knows her stuff
She clearly is a free marketer but caught even Peter schiff a little flatfooted on his inflation prediction

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Her show last week

Her show last week with Stepanie Kelton was about the best I've seen.


Max does great when he talks about silver.

Other than that, he is pretty much a buffoon. He refuses to hold an intelligent discussion about "climate change" also, preferring to go immediately to hurling insults at anyone who questions the official story.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Buffoon about silver too

He is a buffoon all the way down.

He was touting going all-in on silver when it was selling for close to $50 an ounce, telling people they could "crash J.P. Morgan." Absurd. He still maintains that JPM has a gigantic short position in silver that it cannot unroll. Of course he has no way of knowing whether JPM is net-short at all. There are many, many ways that JPM could have long positions in silver that Max would know nothing about.

Ĵīɣȩ Ɖåđşŏń

"Fully half the quotations found on the internet are either mis-attributed, or outright fabrications." - Abraham Lincoln

Austrian economics or Murray Rothbard?

I hear him bashing Murray Rothbard's Austrian school of Anarcho-Capitalism. I'm not a big fan of Max Keiser, but it's nice to see somebody who doesn't hero worship Murray Rothbard or drink his Kool-Aid.


Rothbard studied under Mises, and was a thorough Misesean in his economic thought. All of his economics works build on a Misesean foundation. The only important distinction between Mises and Rothbard was political; i.e. that Mises thought anarcho-capitalism was desirable but impossible, while Rothbard thought it was both desirable and possible. If you have no respect for Murray Rothbard, as is evident in your comment, you are either (a) completely ignorant of who Murray Rothbard was and what he represented, or (b) are hostile to libertarianism.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

You keep saying that, but is it true?

You keep saying I don't know who Murray Rothbard is, yet when you do it, you keep reinforcing that he's exactly what I'm saying he is. Don't you understand? Anarcho-capitalism is neither desirable nor possible. It's indefensible.

a) "completely ignorant?" Back to insulting people and their intelligence if they don't agree with you? This is an Anarchists "go to" move, to insult people; to call them ignorant sheep, retards, and when they get really pissed; stupid soulless animals.

b)Anarchists aren't Libertarians. Anarchists are WORTHLESS to liberty, because their position is worthless to liberty, without value, not possible, and undesirable.

Yes Mises believed in the bastiat view of the law

The law acts as referee to enforce contracts and offer redress for wrongs (Ron Paul is of this school)
Rothbard viewed a law run by the government would almost always side with the government and was opposed to government not just as an instrument of plunder but as an instrument.
Hans hermann hope carries on from Rothbard

Please subscribe to smaulgld.com

Point taken

Yes I agree, what is it about Rothbard that so angers your mentality on the Austrian school?