Ir para o menu de navegação principal Ir para o conteúdo principal Ir para o rodapé
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Ensaios & Insights

v. 8 (2020): Publicação Contínua

Nota sobre um erro na obra Economia em uma única lição

DOI
https://doi.org/10.30800/mises.2020.v8.1258
Enviado
novembro 26, 2019
Publicado
2020-05-17

Resumo

Economia em uma única lição é a melhor introdução à economia que já foi escrita. Atraiu, educou e inspirou milhares de pessoas a adotar os ensinamentos da ciência sombria. Na medida em que existe uma compreensão da economia por parte do público em geral, isso se deve mais a esse livro do que a qualquer outro. No entanto, descobri um erro nele, cuja retificação é minha tentativa de melhorar, levemente, um livro
inestimável sobre economia.

Referências

  1. ANDERSON, William et al. The Microsoft Corporation in Collision with Antitrust Law. The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, v. 26, n. 1, p. 287-302, 2001.
  2. AP. 1988. Farm Population Lowest Since 1850’s. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/20/us/farmpopulation- lowest-since-1850-s.html. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  3. ARMENTANO, Dominick T. The Myths of Antitrust. New Rochelle: Arlington House, 1972.
  4. ARMENTANO, Dominick T. Antitrust and Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure. New York: Wiley, 1982.
  5. ARMENTANO, Dominick T. Antitrust Reform: Predatory Practices and the Competitive Process. Review of Austrian Economics, v. 3, p. 61-74, 1989. Available at: http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae3_1_4.pdf. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  6. ARMENTANO, Dominick T. Antitrust: The Case for Repeal. Auburn: Mises Institute, 1999.
  7. ARMSTRONG, Don. Competition vs. Monopoly. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1982.
  8. BARNETT, William II; BLACK, Walter E. Mises never used demand curves: was he wrong? Ignorant? No: The Antimathematicality of Demand Curves. Dialogue, v. 1, p. 23-31, 2010. Available at: http://www.uni-svishtov.
  9. bg/dialog/title.asp?lang=en&title=101. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  10. BARNETT, William; BLOCK, Walter E.; SALIBA, Michael. Perfect Competition: A Case of Market-Failure. Corporate Ownership & Control, v. 2, n. 4, p. 70-75, 2005.
  11. BARNETT, William II; BLOCK, Walter E.; SALIBA, Michael. Predatory pricing. Corporate Ownership & Control, v. 4, n. 4, p. 401-406, 2007.
  12. BLOCK, Walter E. Thymology, praxeology, demand curves, Giffen goods and diminishing marginal utility. Studia Humana, v. 1/2, p. 3—11, 2012. Available at: http://studiahumana.com/pliki/wydania/Thymology,%20praxeology,%20demand%20curves,%20Giffen%20goods%20and%20diminishing%20marginal%20utility.
  13. pdf;wageshttp://studiahumana.com/art,The-second-issue,Thymology-Praxeology-Demand-Curves-Giffen-Goods-and-Diminishi.html. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  14. BLOCK, Walter E.; BARNETT, William II. Giffen Goods, Backward Bending Supply Curves, Price Controls and Praxeology. Revista Procesos de Mercado, v. 9, n. 1, p. 353-373, 2012.
  15. BLOCK, Walter E.; PHILBOIS, Gabriel. Giffen Goods and Backward Bending Supply Curves of Labor. Revista Estudios Libertarios, v. 1, p. 55-69, 2018. Available at: http://www.notaslibertarias.com/vol-1-2018/. Acessed:
  16. Jul 1 2019.
  17. BLOCK, Walter E. Austrian Monopoly Theory - a Critique. The Journal of Libertarian Studies, v. 1, n. 4, p. 271-279, 1977.
  18. BLOCK, Walter E. Amending the Combines Investigation Act. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1982.
  19. BLOCK, Walter E. Total Repeal of Anti-trust Legislation: A Critique of Bork, Brozen and Posner. Review of Austrian Economics, v. 8, n. 1, p. 35-70, 1984.
  20. BLOCK, Walter; BARNETT, William. Monopsony Theory. American Review of Political Economy, v. 7, n. 1/2, p. 67-109, 2009. Available at: http://www.arpejournal.com/ARPEvolume7number1-2/Block-Barnett.pdf. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  21. BLOCK, Walter E.; WYSICKI, Igor. A defense of Rothbard on the demand curve against Hudik’s critique. Acta Economica et Turistica, p. 47-61, 2018. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=296319. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  22. BOUDREAUX, Donald J.; DILORENZO, Thomas J. The Protectionist Roots of Antitrust. Review of Austrian Economics, v. 6, n. 2, p. 81-96, 1992.
  23. COSTEA, Diana. A Critique of Mises’s Theory of Monopoly Prices. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, v. 6, n. 3, p. 47-62, 2003. Available at: http://www.mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae6_3_3.pdf. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  24. DILORENZO, Thomas J. The origins of antitrust: an interest-group perspective. International Review of Law and Economics, v. 5, p. 73-99, 1985. Available at: http://mason.gmu.edu/~trustici/LAW108/The%20Origins%20of%20Antitrust-20An%20Interest%20Group%20Perspective.pdf. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  25. DILORENZO, Thomas J. The Myth of Natural Monopoly. Review of Austrian Economics, v. 9, n. 2, p. 43-58, 1996. Available at: http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae9_2_3.pdf. Acessed at: Jul 1 2019.
  26. DILORENZO, Thomas J. The Truth About Sherman. Available at: https://mises.org/library/truth-about-sherman. Acessed: Nov 8 2019.
  27. DILORENZO, Thomas J.; HIGH, Jack. Antitrust and Competition, Historically Considered. Economic Inquiry, v. 26, n. 1, p. 423-435, 1998.
  28. HAZLITT, Henry. Economics in One Lesson. Auburn: Mises Institute, 2008 [1946].
  29. HENDERSON, David R. The Robber Barons: Neither Robbers nor Barons. Library of Economics and Liberty, 2013. Available at: http://www.econlib.org/cgi-bin/printarticle2.pl?file=Columns/y2013/Hendersonbarons.html.
  30. Acessed: Mar 24 2019.
  31. HIGH, Jack. Bork’s Paradox: Static vs Dynamic Efficiency in Antitrust Analysis. Contemporary Policy Issues, v. 3, p. 21-34, 1985.
  32. HULL, Gary. The Abolition of Antitrust. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2005.
  33. KLEIN, Peter G. A note on Giffen goods. Unpublished, n/d. Available at: http://web.missouri.edu/~kleinp/misc/
  34. giffen.pdf. Acessed: 1 Jul 2019.
  35. KLEIN, Peter G.; SALERNO, Joseph T. Giffen’s Paradox and the Law of Demand. Unpublished, n/d. Available at: https://mises.org/library/giffen%E2%80%99s-paradox-and-law-demand. Acessed: 1 Jan 2020.
  36. MCCHESNEY, Fred. Antitrust and Regulation: Chicago’s Contradictory Views. Cato Journal, v. 10, 1991.
  37. MCGEE, John S. Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil (New Jersey) Case. The Journal of Law and Economics, p. 137-169, 1958.
  38. MURPHY, Robert P.; WUTSCHER, Robert; BLOCK, Walter E. Mathematics in Economics: An Austrian Methodological Critique. Philosophical Investigations, v. 33, n. 1, p. 44-66, 2010. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.
  39. wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9205.2009.01397.x/full. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  40. PHILBOIS, Gabriel; BLOCK, Walter E. The Z Curve: Supply and Demand for Giffen Goods. MISES: Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Law and Economics, v. 6, n. 3, 2018. Available at: https://misesjournal.org.br/misesjournal/
  41. article/view/311. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  42. ROTHBARD, Murray N. Man, Economy and State. Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2004 [1962].
  43. SHUGART, William F. Don’t Revise the Clayton Act, Scrap It!. Cato Journal, v. 6, 1987.
  44. SMITH, Jr.; FRED, L. Why not Abolish Antitrust?, Regulation 1983. Available at: http://cei.org/op-eds-andarticles/
  45. why-not-abolish-antitrust. Acessed: Jan 23 2020.
  46. TUCKER, Jeffrey. Controversy: Are Antitrust Laws Immoral?. Journal of Markets & Morality, v. 1, n. 1, 1998a.
  47. Available at: http://www.acton.org/publications/mandm/mandm_controversy_35.php. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  48. TUCKER, Jeffrey. Controversy: Are Antitrust Laws Immoral? A Response to Kenneth G. Elzinga. Journal of Markets & Morality, v. 1, n. 1, p. 90-94, 1998b. Available at: http://www.acton.org/publications/mandm/mandm_controversy_37.php. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  49. U.S. Census Bureau 2014. Available at: https://www.census.gov/prod/www/agriculture.html. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.
  50. U.S. Census Bureau 2019. Available at: https://www.nass.usda.gov/AgCensus/. Acessed: Jan 1 2020.
  51. WYSOCKI, Igor; BLOCK, Walter E. The Giffen good – a praxeological approach. Ekonomia Wrocław Economic Review, v. 24, n. 2, p. 9-22, 2018. Available at: http://repozytorium.uni.wroc.pl/dlibra/publication/100651/
  52. edition/94179/content?ref=desc. Acessed: Jul 1 2019.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.