No that is correct. That is the austrian theory of money.
Post by twetch#1832
There is no one Austrian theory of money. If you think this is Rothbard's interpretation (which I'd disagree with), then he's got his own flavor of monetary theory that other Austrians disagree with.
What the chain says
- Block
- 635 519
- Time
- 2020-05-19T01:14:12Z
- Signer
- 17zmPibuXUuDsPnW5B4UVsV9jin35HWWU2
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/plain
- Name in tx
- twetch#1832
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
Signed by
17zmPibuXUuDsPnW5B4UVsV9jin35HWWU2 VerifiedReplies (10)
Rothbard was just following Mises.
And many Austrians think Rothbard is worse on money than Mises. I tend to agree, but it's been a while since I've read him. I know he abuses apriorism, like Hoppe afterwards.
Regardless, Mises-Rothbard is only one sect of Austrian monetary theory.
Is money a present good?
Are you asking for my economic theory or Rothbard's? If the latter, he'd say money is a present good.