The Essential Rothbard - Ludwig von Mises Institute
The Essential Rothbard - Ludwig von Mises Institute
The Essential Rothbard - Ludwig von Mises Institute
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
18 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Essential</strong> <strong>Rothbard</strong><br />
that the demand curve to a firm cannot be perfectly elastic<br />
throughout. 24<br />
Capital theory is central to Austrian economics, and <strong>Rothbard</strong><br />
attaches especial importance to his unification of Frank Fetter’s<br />
“brilliant and neglected theory of rent” 25 with the pure time preference<br />
theory of interest and the Austrian theory of the structure<br />
of production. It is hardly surprising that he was keen to show the<br />
advantages of the Austrian view against competing doctrines, and<br />
he gives a penetrating criticism of the main alternative position.<br />
According to Frank Knight, capital is a perpetual fund; this contrasts<br />
with the Austrian view, pioneered by Eugen <strong>von</strong> Böhm-Bawerk,<br />
that stresses the stages of production over time. <strong>Rothbard</strong><br />
assails this theory in the form given to it by one of Knight’s disciples,<br />
Earl Rolph.<br />
Let Rolph picture a production system, atomized or integrated<br />
as the case may be, with no one making the advances<br />
of present goods (money capital) that he denies exist. And as<br />
the laborers and landowners work on the intermediate products<br />
for years without pay, until the finished product is ready<br />
for the consumer, let Rolph exhort them not to worry, since<br />
they have been implicitly paid simultaneously as they worked.<br />
For this is the logical implication of the Knight-Rolph position.<br />
26<br />
<strong>Rothbard</strong> offers a fundamental and far reaching criticism of<br />
Keynesian economics. He begins his assault on Keynes by pointing<br />
out that at the basis of the entire Keynesian system is a false<br />
assumption. Keynes maintained that total spending could fall short<br />
of what is needed to maintain full employment. But how can this<br />
be? If workers are unemployed, will they not bid down wages?<br />
How then can there be continued unemployment on the free market?<br />
24 Ibid., p. 721; emphasis in the original.<br />
25<br />
Ibid., p. xcv.<br />
26<br />
Ibid., p. 507.