Mises’ and Rothbard’s Inadequate Treatment of Technology– And why a correct understanding of technology challenges the Austrian theory of time preference
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52195/pm.v17i1.10Abstract
In their seminal treatises Human Action (1949) and Man, Economy and State (1962), Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard deny that the rise in living standards achieved in the 19th and 20th century should be explained by technological progress and the resulting productivity increases. Rather, it is the praxeological category of time preference that allegedly explains in the increase in savings, capital accumulation and economic progress. The pre- sented paper criticizes Mises’s and Rothbard’s dismissive treatment of technol- ogy and argues that time only acquires economic meaning in its reference to objects of choice. As choice implies an understanding of causal relations between means and ends, human action inevitably presupposes knowledge about the use of technology in its capacity to accommodate intertemporal plans. When people thus employ means to pursue ends, the time factor is already embodied in the feasible consumption and production patterns, which are nothing but the outcomes of the prevailing technological possibilities. When human action requires contextualization to acquire meaning, then the ideas of time and time preference cannot exist independently of the particular means- ends-framework.
Keywords: Technology, time preference, time, profit, saving
JEL Classification: B53, D46, D50, E22, O30
Resumen: En sus tratados fundamentales La acción humana (1949) y Hombre, economía y Estado (1962), Ludwig von Mises y Murray Rothbard niegan que el aumento del nivel de vida alcanzado en los siglos XIX y XX deba explicarse por el progreso tecnológico y los aumentos de productividad resultantes. Más bien, es la categoría praxeológica de preferencia temporal la que supuesta- mente explica el aumento en el ahorro, la acumulación de capital y el progreso económico. El documento presentado critica el tratamiento despectivo de la tecnología por Mises y Rothbard y argumenta que el tiempo sólo adquiere un significado económico en su referencia a los objetos de selección. Como la selección implica una comprensión de las relaciones causales entre medios y fines, la acción humana presupone inevitablemente el conocimiento sobre el uso de la tecnología en su capacidad de acomodar planes intertemporales. Cuando las personas emplean medios para perseguir fines, el factor tiempo ya está incorporado en los patrones realizables de consumo y producción, que no son más que el resultado de las posibilidades tecnológicas imperantes. Cuando la acción humana requiere contextualización para adquirir significado, enton- ces las ideas de tiempo y preferencia de tiempo no pueden existir independien- temente del marco particular de medios-fines.
Palabras clave: Tecnología, preferencia temporal, tiempo, ganancia, ahorro
Clasificación JEL: B53, D46, D50, E22, O30
References
Böhm-Bawerk E (1890) Capital and interest, a critical history of econom- ical theory. London, New York: Macmillan and Co.
Domar E (1946). “Capital expansion, rate of growth, and employ- ment.” Econometrica, vol. 14(2), 137–47.
Foss N, Klein P (2002) Entrepreneurship and the firm - Austrian perspec- tives on economic organization. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, UK.
— (2010) “Entrepreneurial alertness and opportunity discovery: Origins, attributes, critique.” Foss, N. J., & Klein, P. G. (2010). In H. Landström, & F. Lohrke, The Historical Foundations of Entre- preneurship Research (chapter 5). Northhampton: Edward Elgar.
— (2012) Organizing entrepreneurial judgment: A new approach to the firm. Cambridge University Press.
Garrison R (2000) Time and money: The macroeconomics of capital structure. Routledge.
Harrod R (1939). “Essay in dynamic theory.” The Economic Journal, Volume 49, Issue 193, 1 March 1939, 14-33,
Hayek FA (1931) Prices and production. A. M. Kelly, New York
— (1936) “The mythology of capital.” The Quarterly Journal of Eco- nomics, no. 50, 199-228
— (1939) “Price expectations, monetary disturbances, and malin- vestments.” In: Hayek, Profits, Interest, and Investment. Reprint (1975). New York: A. M. Kelley.
Herbener J (editor, 2011) Introduction. The pure time preference theory of interest. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute
Hülsmann G (2002) “A theory of interest.” Quarterly Journal of Aus- trian Economics, vol. 5, no. 4, 77-110
— (2008) “Time preference and investment expenditure.” Procesos de Mercado: Revista Europea de Economía Política, vol. V, no. 2, 13-33
Kirzner I (1973) Competition and entrepreneurship, University of Chi- cago Press
Klein P (2008) “Opportunity discovery, entrepreneurial action, and economic organization.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2, 175-190.
— (2010). The capitalist and the entrepreneur. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Knight F (1921) Risk, uncertainty, and profit. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Lachmann L (1959), “Professor Shackle on the economic signifi- cance of time”, Metroeconomica, Vol. XI, no. 1-2, 64-73.
Lachmann LM (1977) Capital, expectations and the market process. Sheed Andrews and McMeel Inc., Subsidiary of Universal Press Syndicate Kansas City
Menger C (1871/2007) Principles of economics, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn
Mises L (1949/1998) Human action. The Scholar’s Edition, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn
— (1962) The ultimate foundation of science, D. Van Nostrand Com- pany, New York
— (1951/2008) Profit and loss. Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn O’Driscoll GP Jr., Rizzo M Jr. (1985) The economics of time and ignorance, Routledge
Rothbard M (1962/2009) Man, economy and the state. The Scholar’s Edition, 2nd Edition, Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn
Salerno JT (2008) “The Entrepreneur: Real and Imagined.” The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 11, No. 3 and 4, 188-207
Selgin GA (1990) Praxeology and Understanding. Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn
Solow R (1956) “A contribution to the theory of economic growth.”The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70(1), 65–94.
