To quote the last paragraph of this 2008 article by Robert Murphy, when asked why Austrian school economics should be studied, the best answer is: “the Austrian theory of capital is the best one you can find if you really want to grasp how the economy actually works—beyond sterile mathematics and static timeless analysis.”
The Austrian school’s understanding of capital and production relies upon three main pillars. First: the factors of production comprise both nature-given factors—namely land and labor—and non-nature-given (i.e., produced by giving up production aimed at immediate consumption) ones—namely capital goods. Second: production in a capitalistic economy requires time and features several stages. Third: the ultimate source of wants satisfaction—and

Modern central banks have already moved far beyond what was once considered the proper role for a central bank as a “lender of last resort.” Now Keynesians and MMTers (modern monetary theorists) want to take things even further.
As the COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent freezing of economic activity take place, many economists are hoping for central bankers and monetary policy to take the lead and steer the economy. However, this cannot possibly be the solution—the shock being mainly a supply one rather than a demand one. Moreover, a fiery debate is taking place within the eurozone about European Central Bank’s role and, more precisely, its (unduly disputed) nature as a full-fledged lender of last resort (LoLR).
There are two main stripes amongst those

When Mario Draghi’s tenure was approaching its end, I argued for a sterner governor for the European Central Bank (ECB); hence, I was not even slightly enthusiastic when Draghi’s successor turned out to be Christine Lagarde—a patent dove, as can be inferred from her ideological proximity to a famous Keynesian like Olivier Blanchard.
However, I am here to defend the stance she took with her March 12 speech—in which, addressing the economic turmoil spurred by the coronavirus crisis, she declared that it was not a central banker’s job to prevent the occurrence of spreads on financial markets—which has been fiercely attacked both by Italian media and politicians, and even by Italian president Sergio Mattarella. There are three reasons why I deem, for once,