Quote:
This Keynesian good living boom/bust will just aggrevate the downside.
But in the original post, Hultberg says that boom/bust cycles existed pre-Keynes, and were actually welcome events:
Quote:
Recessions have been common throughout our history, and the country has always ridden them out because its political and economic leaders understood that such a "riding out" was necessary to purge the system of its excesses and thus be able to return to real growth again.
Czech is correct: There is no such thing as a 'free-market' which has no governmental context. On the world scale, markets can only operate inside a framework of societies complex enough to provide a court system to enforce contracts without resort to war. Along the way to that level of complexity, each of those societies invents other things like infrastructure, taxes, tariffs, import quotas, and economic systems whether of the Keynsian flavor or otherwise.

So paraphrasing what Czech said, for the von Mises true believers there are really only three choices:

1. Isolation in some remote hinterland where the free market gold that the owner presumably dug out of the ground with his own bare hands will be safe;

2. Spending some of the gold to hire a private army sufficient to defend it;

3. Agree that raising a public army to defend private wealth may entail an economic system that re-distributes some amount of private wealth to others.

In the long run, it really doesn't matter what economic system is chosen if the system implies infinite growth. We are all equally dead. But the faster the growth system gets to its inevitable conclusion, the fewer will be the number who are alive to suffer that fate.