What do you think?
Rate this book
CRÍTICA DEL INTERVENCIONISMO
Este volumen reúne los ensayos que, a partir de los años veinte, publicó Ludwig von Mises sobre el fracaso del estado intervencionista. A ellos se añade un trabajo sobre el mismo tema, escrito por el autor al poco de su llegada a Estados Unidos, e inédito hasta hace poco.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1929
About the author
Ludwig von Mises
326 books1,278 followersLudwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (German pronunciation: [ˈluːtvɪç fɔn ˈmiːzəs]; September 29, 1881 – October 10, 1973) was an Austrian economist, historian, philosopher, author, and classical liberal who had a significant influence on the Austrian government's economic policies in the first third of the 20th century, the Austrian School of Economics, and the modern free-market libertarian movement.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
May 8, 2020
10 Oct. 2017
Just finished listening to the audio version of this book put out by Laissez Faire Books.
Unfortunately, I don't think they even offer it to the public, since their audio book section/program seems to be pretty much dormant these days. I originally read the book shortly after the English translation came out in 1977, but listening over the last week or two has been very instructive, almost 40 years later.
The book is a good one, but it is a bit peculiar for current audiences, since the particular authors (of interventionist ideas) it deals with are mostly Germans from about 100 years ago. Many of their ideas are still basically current, and Mises's critiques of the various plans and theories are fundamentally sound and therefore currently applicable too. But I fear the historical nature of the book's details will limit those who would be willing to stick through the whole thing.
But the main ideas are as relevant now, perhaps even more so, than they were when written in the 1920s. The idea that there is a "third way" as different from socialism as from capitalism, stable, distinct and beneficial to society, is as fallacious now, as it was back then. Mises thoroughly shreds this idea from many angles and examples.
Mises' basic idea that government intervention in the market leads to more and more interventions, and ultimately outright socialism, OR the opposite, massive repeals of interventions and a free market capitalism, because the interventions have the opposite results that the proponents of those interventions [claim to?] want, is totally relevant today.
So if this book can inform and inspire any historian, political scientist, economist, sociologist, journalist, attorney, ... ANYONE, to understand this basic idea, and then simply apply it to modern day issues. the world will be better off.
One issue screaming out for such treatment is the incredibly complex (legally and in it's effects), but fundamentally simple interventions of Obamacare (incredibly named: "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" since it has achieved virtually the opposite.) as well as so many other government interventions into healthcare markets over the last 80-100 years or so. There have been many studies from some good economists and policy analysts who have critiqued these interventions, and even using, more or less, the basic economic tools and perspective that Mises uses in this book. But they have not proven as influential, or marshaled the political backing to stop the interventions before being passed, let alone to repeal them once passed, despite the widespread acknowledgement that "the Patients" are NOT being "Protect[ed]" and "Care" is becoming ever less "Affordable" in most every instance, except for certain subsidized groups who do not pay the full costs.
Other interventions also seem to reign supreme too often, from Minimum Wages (though occasionally repealed here and there, or more often just inflated away to insignificance), to rent controls, punitive tariffs, subsidies for housing, "green energy", etc. - you name it.
So my recommendation is that this book would be great to skim for most anyone interested in whether a society that is "middle way" between socialism and capitalism is possible and a reasonable ideal or just practical goal. But don't get bogged down with worrying about the particular names of the people or certain old plans being critiqued. Look at whether they are fundamentally the same as what is being proposed or passed now. See if the analysis of Mises rings true theoretically, as well as in practice then and now. Are the interventions working, giving the proposers (and duped public) of them exactly what they promise? Does the min. wage actually raise the wages of *all* the workers who previously worked for a lower wage? Or does it kick some/many of them out of jobs? Do changes to the nature of some of those jobs occur: machines are substituted for the manual work? Or does the law push jobs to go away, since consumers are unwilling to pay the extra costs?
----------
About the narrator, Richard Sigler: He has a good voice. However, his pronunciation of some pretty important names, such as the translator Hans Sennholz, other names and words, made me cringe. Also his incredibly dramatic vocal tone and high volume in many places was way over the top, and not appropriate in my judgement.
-----
This English translation of the original German book was ably accomplished by Hans Sennholz, who earned his PhD in economics at NYU under Mises. It is very good.
If my review above has too many red flags for you, you might prefer his later, shorter and more succinct book "Interventionism" from 1940. See my review from last year of that wonderful little book: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
---
Here is an excerpt from the book that I especially liked:
"The economic layman only observes that "interested parties succeed again and again in escaping the strictures of law. The fact that the system functions poorly is blamed exclusively on the law that does not go far enough, and on corruption that prevents its application. The very failure of interventionism reinforces the layman's conviction that private property must be controlled severely. The corruption of the regulatory bodies does not shake this blind confidence in the infallibility and perfection of the state; it merely fills him with moral aversion to entrepreneurs and capitalists." p. 30
And just a page later:
"To be sure, public opinion is not mistaken if it scents corruption everywhere in the interventionist state. The corruptibility of the politicians, representative, and officials is the very foundation that carries the system. Without it the system would disintegrate or be replaced with socialism or capitalism. Classical liberalism regarded those laws best that afforded least discretionary power to executive authorities, thus avoiding arbitrariness and abuse. The modern state seeks to expand its discretionary power - everything is to be left to the discretion of officials."
Just finished listening to the audio version of this book put out by Laissez Faire Books.
Unfortunately, I don't think they even offer it to the public, since their audio book section/program seems to be pretty much dormant these days. I originally read the book shortly after the English translation came out in 1977, but listening over the last week or two has been very instructive, almost 40 years later.
The book is a good one, but it is a bit peculiar for current audiences, since the particular authors (of interventionist ideas) it deals with are mostly Germans from about 100 years ago. Many of their ideas are still basically current, and Mises's critiques of the various plans and theories are fundamentally sound and therefore currently applicable too. But I fear the historical nature of the book's details will limit those who would be willing to stick through the whole thing.
But the main ideas are as relevant now, perhaps even more so, than they were when written in the 1920s. The idea that there is a "third way" as different from socialism as from capitalism, stable, distinct and beneficial to society, is as fallacious now, as it was back then. Mises thoroughly shreds this idea from many angles and examples.
Mises' basic idea that government intervention in the market leads to more and more interventions, and ultimately outright socialism, OR the opposite, massive repeals of interventions and a free market capitalism, because the interventions have the opposite results that the proponents of those interventions [claim to?] want, is totally relevant today.
So if this book can inform and inspire any historian, political scientist, economist, sociologist, journalist, attorney, ... ANYONE, to understand this basic idea, and then simply apply it to modern day issues. the world will be better off.
One issue screaming out for such treatment is the incredibly complex (legally and in it's effects), but fundamentally simple interventions of Obamacare (incredibly named: "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" since it has achieved virtually the opposite.) as well as so many other government interventions into healthcare markets over the last 80-100 years or so. There have been many studies from some good economists and policy analysts who have critiqued these interventions, and even using, more or less, the basic economic tools and perspective that Mises uses in this book. But they have not proven as influential, or marshaled the political backing to stop the interventions before being passed, let alone to repeal them once passed, despite the widespread acknowledgement that "the Patients" are NOT being "Protect[ed]" and "Care" is becoming ever less "Affordable" in most every instance, except for certain subsidized groups who do not pay the full costs.
Other interventions also seem to reign supreme too often, from Minimum Wages (though occasionally repealed here and there, or more often just inflated away to insignificance), to rent controls, punitive tariffs, subsidies for housing, "green energy", etc. - you name it.
So my recommendation is that this book would be great to skim for most anyone interested in whether a society that is "middle way" between socialism and capitalism is possible and a reasonable ideal or just practical goal. But don't get bogged down with worrying about the particular names of the people or certain old plans being critiqued. Look at whether they are fundamentally the same as what is being proposed or passed now. See if the analysis of Mises rings true theoretically, as well as in practice then and now. Are the interventions working, giving the proposers (and duped public) of them exactly what they promise? Does the min. wage actually raise the wages of *all* the workers who previously worked for a lower wage? Or does it kick some/many of them out of jobs? Do changes to the nature of some of those jobs occur: machines are substituted for the manual work? Or does the law push jobs to go away, since consumers are unwilling to pay the extra costs?
----------
About the narrator, Richard Sigler: He has a good voice. However, his pronunciation of some pretty important names, such as the translator Hans Sennholz, other names and words, made me cringe. Also his incredibly dramatic vocal tone and high volume in many places was way over the top, and not appropriate in my judgement.
-----
This English translation of the original German book was ably accomplished by Hans Sennholz, who earned his PhD in economics at NYU under Mises. It is very good.
If my review above has too many red flags for you, you might prefer his later, shorter and more succinct book "Interventionism" from 1940. See my review from last year of that wonderful little book: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
---
Here is an excerpt from the book that I especially liked:
"The economic layman only observes that "interested parties succeed again and again in escaping the strictures of law. The fact that the system functions poorly is blamed exclusively on the law that does not go far enough, and on corruption that prevents its application. The very failure of interventionism reinforces the layman's conviction that private property must be controlled severely. The corruption of the regulatory bodies does not shake this blind confidence in the infallibility and perfection of the state; it merely fills him with moral aversion to entrepreneurs and capitalists." p. 30
And just a page later:
"To be sure, public opinion is not mistaken if it scents corruption everywhere in the interventionist state. The corruptibility of the politicians, representative, and officials is the very foundation that carries the system. Without it the system would disintegrate or be replaced with socialism or capitalism. Classical liberalism regarded those laws best that afforded least discretionary power to executive authorities, thus avoiding arbitrariness and abuse. The modern state seeks to expand its discretionary power - everything is to be left to the discretion of officials."
January 7, 2025
Mises demonstrates quite convincingly and conclusively that a 'third way' between socialism and capitalism as a system of social organization (cooperation) must fail in meeting its ends. But it makes me wonder whether these are the ends that a system of interventionism aims to reach?
Also curious why Mises prefers the word etatists to statists?
Also curious why Mises prefers the word etatists to statists?
June 24, 2022
Li o ensaio O Intervencionismo por Ludwig von Mises, disponibilizado pelo Instituto + Liberdade
June 30, 2026
"There is no other choice: government either abstains from limited interference with the market forces, or it assumes total control over production and distribution. Either capitalism or socialism; there is no middle of the road." - Ludwig von Mises
1. Interventionism
1.1. Interventionism as an Economic System
Capitalism: private ownership of the means of production
Socialism or communism: Public (societal or communal) ownership of the means of production.
Interventionism: A supposed middle-of-the-road. "a private property order in a formal [nominal] sense, but socialism in substance."
1.2. The Nature of Intervention
"Intervention is a limited order by a social authority forcing the owners of the means of production and entrepreneurs to employ their means in a different manner than they otherwise would."
To clarify, the following do not count as interventions:
- "Measures that are taken for the purpose of preserving and securing the private property order"
- "Partial socialization of the means of production ... Nationalization of a railroad constitutes no intervention; but a decree that orders an enterprise to charge lower freight rates than it otherwise would is intervention."
- Gov't subsidies (but if the subsidies are funded through forced taxation - as opposed to, say, voluntary contributions, then the taxation counts as an intervention.)
Two common types of interventions: restrictions of production, and interference with the structure of prices.
1.3. Restrictions of Production
"production restrictions reduce the productivity of human labor. The result is always the same: a given expenditure of capital and labor yields less with the restriction than without it, or from the beginning less capital and labor is invested in production."
For e.g.
- Tariffs on agricultural imports causes "grain to be grown in less fertile soil while more fertile land is lying fallow"
- Occupational licensing causes less productive businesses by raising the barrier to hire more people or start new businesses
- Labor regulations (working hours limits or making it illegal to hire certain people) diminishes the quantity of available labor
"Government cannot create anything .. Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer."
"it is difficult to ignore the fact that production restrictions always reduce the productivity of human labor and thus the social dividend. Therefore, no one dares defend the restrictions as a separate system of economic policy. Their advocates—at least the majority of them—are now promoting them as mere supplements to government interference with the structure of prices. The emphasis of the system of interventionism is on price intervention."
1.4. Interference with prices
"Price intervention aims at setting goods prices that differ from those the unhampered market would set."
General pattern of the intervention spiral:
1. Society demands intervention
2. Intervention is implemented
3. Intervention causes a new problem
4. Intervention is deemed insufficient
5. Society demands new intervention to solve the new problem. Repeat until complete gov't control.
E.g. Price ceiling on milk -> milk shortage -> price ceiling on inputs of milk -> repeat until complete gov't control.
minimum wage laws -> higher cost of labor -> lower employment -> higher taxes to fund unemployment programs -> less capital to invest in private sector -> lower employment -> repeat until complete gov't control.
rent control laws -> housing shortage -> people move to another area -> rents increase in that area -> rent control laws -> cascading housing shortage -> "free market has failed! gov't must do something" -> tax-funded gov't housing programs or appropriation of private housing -> repeat until complete gov't control.
1.5. Destruction Resulting from Intervention
When gov't intervention fails, people blame "corruption" instead of blaming the bad law, and demand stricter enforcement. But stricter enforcement of a bad law leads to even worse outcomes.
"If the price ceilings were really enforced, the delivery of milk and dairy products to the cities would soon come to a halt. Not more, but less milk, or none at all, would come to the market. The consumer still gets his milk only because the regulations are circumvented. .. the milk dealer who violates the law is serving the public interest; the government official who seeks to enforce the ceiling price is jeopardizing it."
1.7. The historical and practical arguments for interventionism
Argument: "Other countries have the same policy" or "we've had this policy for a long time."
Mises: "The fact that measures have been taken, and continue to be taken, does not prove that they are suitable. It only proves that their sponsors did not recognize their unsuitability."
Argument: "Large interventions may be bad, but small interventions aren't so bad."
Mises: "All this can also be said about an earthquake or any other natural catastrophe. .. It is obvious and undeniable that the quantitative consequences of an intervention depend on the severity of the intervention. A small earthquake destroys less than a big one, and a very small earthquake may leave no visible traces at all."
2. The Hampered Market Economy
Mises clarifies that "free competition" doesn't mean anything like "competition in which everyone has the same starting point", a view that leads to violation of private property in order to "correct the starting point" for some people.
Rather, "free competition" is simply means competition where private property is free from coercion. Such competition leads to a better/cheaper market goods to meet consumer demand over time.
Mises says that when it comes to removing interventions, gradual isn't necessarily better than immediate: "in the case of government interferences with prices, a slow and gradual reduction, when compared with their immediate abolition, only prolongs the time during which the undesirable consequences of the intervention continue to be felt."
3. Social Liberalism
(Social Liberals refers to what's more commonly known as Social Democrats today - people seeking some compromise between capitalism (liberalism) and socialism.)
"The term “social liberalism” sounds strange indeed as socialism and liberalism are mutually exclusive. But we are accustomed to such terminology. Also, socialism and democracy are irreconcilable in the final analysis, and yet there is the old concept of “Social Democracy,” which is a contradictio in adjecto."
Claim: Private property and inheritance give rise to unearned income, so it's okay to take a "middle ground" with socialists and support their efforts to oppose this unearned income from inheritance.
Mises: it's the owner's choice to decide how to dispose of their property. "unearned income flows from control over the means of production. He who opposes unearned income must oppose private property in the means of production."
1. Interventionism
1.1. Interventionism as an Economic System
Capitalism: private ownership of the means of production
Socialism or communism: Public (societal or communal) ownership of the means of production.
Interventionism: A supposed middle-of-the-road. "a private property order in a formal [nominal] sense, but socialism in substance."
1.2. The Nature of Intervention
"Intervention is a limited order by a social authority forcing the owners of the means of production and entrepreneurs to employ their means in a different manner than they otherwise would."
To clarify, the following do not count as interventions:
- "Measures that are taken for the purpose of preserving and securing the private property order"
- "Partial socialization of the means of production ... Nationalization of a railroad constitutes no intervention; but a decree that orders an enterprise to charge lower freight rates than it otherwise would is intervention."
- Gov't subsidies (but if the subsidies are funded through forced taxation - as opposed to, say, voluntary contributions, then the taxation counts as an intervention.)
Two common types of interventions: restrictions of production, and interference with the structure of prices.
1.3. Restrictions of Production
"production restrictions reduce the productivity of human labor. The result is always the same: a given expenditure of capital and labor yields less with the restriction than without it, or from the beginning less capital and labor is invested in production."
For e.g.
- Tariffs on agricultural imports causes "grain to be grown in less fertile soil while more fertile land is lying fallow"
- Occupational licensing causes less productive businesses by raising the barrier to hire more people or start new businesses
- Labor regulations (working hours limits or making it illegal to hire certain people) diminishes the quantity of available labor
"Government cannot create anything .. Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer."
"it is difficult to ignore the fact that production restrictions always reduce the productivity of human labor and thus the social dividend. Therefore, no one dares defend the restrictions as a separate system of economic policy. Their advocates—at least the majority of them—are now promoting them as mere supplements to government interference with the structure of prices. The emphasis of the system of interventionism is on price intervention."
1.4. Interference with prices
"Price intervention aims at setting goods prices that differ from those the unhampered market would set."
General pattern of the intervention spiral:
1. Society demands intervention
2. Intervention is implemented
3. Intervention causes a new problem
4. Intervention is deemed insufficient
5. Society demands new intervention to solve the new problem. Repeat until complete gov't control.
E.g. Price ceiling on milk -> milk shortage -> price ceiling on inputs of milk -> repeat until complete gov't control.
minimum wage laws -> higher cost of labor -> lower employment -> higher taxes to fund unemployment programs -> less capital to invest in private sector -> lower employment -> repeat until complete gov't control.
rent control laws -> housing shortage -> people move to another area -> rents increase in that area -> rent control laws -> cascading housing shortage -> "free market has failed! gov't must do something" -> tax-funded gov't housing programs or appropriation of private housing -> repeat until complete gov't control.
1.5. Destruction Resulting from Intervention
When gov't intervention fails, people blame "corruption" instead of blaming the bad law, and demand stricter enforcement. But stricter enforcement of a bad law leads to even worse outcomes.
"If the price ceilings were really enforced, the delivery of milk and dairy products to the cities would soon come to a halt. Not more, but less milk, or none at all, would come to the market. The consumer still gets his milk only because the regulations are circumvented. .. the milk dealer who violates the law is serving the public interest; the government official who seeks to enforce the ceiling price is jeopardizing it."
1.7. The historical and practical arguments for interventionism
Argument: "Other countries have the same policy" or "we've had this policy for a long time."
Mises: "The fact that measures have been taken, and continue to be taken, does not prove that they are suitable. It only proves that their sponsors did not recognize their unsuitability."
Argument: "Large interventions may be bad, but small interventions aren't so bad."
Mises: "All this can also be said about an earthquake or any other natural catastrophe. .. It is obvious and undeniable that the quantitative consequences of an intervention depend on the severity of the intervention. A small earthquake destroys less than a big one, and a very small earthquake may leave no visible traces at all."
2. The Hampered Market Economy
Mises clarifies that "free competition" doesn't mean anything like "competition in which everyone has the same starting point", a view that leads to violation of private property in order to "correct the starting point" for some people.
Rather, "free competition" is simply means competition where private property is free from coercion. Such competition leads to a better/cheaper market goods to meet consumer demand over time.
Mises says that when it comes to removing interventions, gradual isn't necessarily better than immediate: "in the case of government interferences with prices, a slow and gradual reduction, when compared with their immediate abolition, only prolongs the time during which the undesirable consequences of the intervention continue to be felt."
3. Social Liberalism
(Social Liberals refers to what's more commonly known as Social Democrats today - people seeking some compromise between capitalism (liberalism) and socialism.)
"The term “social liberalism” sounds strange indeed as socialism and liberalism are mutually exclusive. But we are accustomed to such terminology. Also, socialism and democracy are irreconcilable in the final analysis, and yet there is the old concept of “Social Democracy,” which is a contradictio in adjecto."
Claim: Private property and inheritance give rise to unearned income, so it's okay to take a "middle ground" with socialists and support their efforts to oppose this unearned income from inheritance.
Mises: it's the owner's choice to decide how to dispose of their property. "unearned income flows from control over the means of production. He who opposes unearned income must oppose private property in the means of production."
June 11, 2018
"Quem pede maior intervenção estatal está, em última análise, pedindo mais coerção e menos liberdade"
Apesar do cenário da obra se passar durante a República de Weimar em 1920, o livro é bastante pontual no que diz respeito ao combate dos programas sociais e econômicos promovidos pelo governo, mostra que os distúrbios causados pela interferência estatal só agravam determinada situação. O livro aborda muito bem a idéia de muitos que ao se verem encurralados em escolher o liberalismo ou o comunismo adentram no "meio termo" onde tentam controlar a economia em um livre mercado ou tentando democratizar o caos do comunismo.
Apesar do cenário da obra se passar durante a República de Weimar em 1920, o livro é bastante pontual no que diz respeito ao combate dos programas sociais e econômicos promovidos pelo governo, mostra que os distúrbios causados pela interferência estatal só agravam determinada situação. O livro aborda muito bem a idéia de muitos que ao se verem encurralados em escolher o liberalismo ou o comunismo adentram no "meio termo" onde tentam controlar a economia em um livre mercado ou tentando democratizar o caos do comunismo.
August 24, 2024
Me gusta la claridad con la que escribe Mises, defiende su postura y critica las contrarias. Es de destacar que su crítica siempre es sin juicios de valor, es decir, no es porque el socialismo o el intervencionismo sea malo en sí sino que teóricamente está mal concebido por los resultados que demuestra, una calidad argumentativa sería ideal recuperar en mucha de la narrativa liberal actual.
June 2, 2020
I found this book to be okay, Mises can be a bit meandering, and I didn't find that this collection of essays really fit all that well together.
February 12, 2021
Um livro muito interessante, mas às vezes cansativo (quando o autor discorre sobre outros autores).
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews