Henry Hazlitt citations

Henry Hazlitt photo
1   0

Henry Hazlitt

Date de naissance: 28. novembre 1894
Date de décès: 9. juillet 1993
Autres noms:헨리 해즐릿, هنری هزلیت

Publicité

Henry Hazlitt est un philosophe, essayiste, économiste et journaliste libertarien américain.

Journaliste au Wall Street Journal, à Newsweek et au New York Times, il s'est fait connaître grâce à son livre L’Économie Politique en une Leçon, un ouvrage de vulgarisation sur les principes de l'économie de marché, basé sur Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas de Frédéric Bastiat. Auteur prolifique, il est aussi l'auteur d'une œuvre majeure sur l'éthique, The Foundations of Morality.

Dans son ouvrage de 1959, The Failure of the New Economics: An Analysis of the Keynesian Fallacies, il établit une critique méthodique et systématique de la Théorie générale de l'emploi, de l'intérêt et de la monnaie de John Maynard Keynes. Il en dira même qu'il « n'a pas pu y trouver une seule doctrine qui soit vraie et originale. Ce qui est original dans son livre est faux et ce qui est juste n'est pas nouveau ».

Très proche de la romancière et philosophe Ayn Rand dans les années 1940-1950, sa pensée fut influencée par cette dernière.

Auteurs similaires

Hubert Beuve-Méry5
journaliste français
Albert Camus photo
Albert Camus93
écrivain et journaliste français
Hannah Arendt photo
Hannah Arendt27
philosophe américaine d'origine allemande
David Icke photo
David Icke8
écrivain britannique
 Colette photo
Colette49
romancière française
René Lévesque photo
René Lévesque8
politicien canadien
Pier Paolo Pasolini photo
Pier Paolo Pasolini8
écrivain, poète, journaliste, scénariste et réalisateur ita…
Honoré de Balzac photo
Honoré de Balzac193
romancier, critique littéraire, essayiste, journaliste et é…
Anatole France photo
Anatole France54
écrivain, biographe, journaliste et critique littéraire fra…

Citations Henry Hazlitt

„Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas“

—  Henry Hazlitt
Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics

Publicité

„Let us begin with the simplest illustration possible: let us, emulating Bastiat, choose a broken pane of glass.A young hoodlum, say, heaves a brick through the window of a baker’s shop. The shopkeeper runs out furious, but the boy is gone. A crowd gathers, and begins to stare with quiet satisfaction at the gaping hole in the window and the shattered glass over the bread and pies. After a while the crowd feels the need for philosophic reflection. And several of its members are almost certain to remind each other or the baker that, after all, the misfortune has its bright side. It will make business for some glazier. As they begin to think of this they elaborate upon it. How much does a new plate glass window cost? Fifty dollars? That will be quite a sum. After all, if windows were never broken, what would happen to the glass business? Then, of course, the thing is endless. The glazier will have $50 more to spend with other merchants, and these in turn will have $50 more to spend with still other merchants, and so ad infinitum. The smashed window will go on providing money and employment in ever-widening circles. The logical conclusion from all this would be, if the crowd drew it, that the little hoodlum who threw the brick, far from being a public menace, was a public benefactor.Now let us take another look. The crowd is at least right in its first conclusion. This little act of vandalism will in the first instance mean more business for some glazier. The glazier will be no more unhappy to learn of the incident than an undertaker to learn of a death. But the shopkeeper will be out $50 that he was planning to spend for a new suit. Because he has had to replace a window, he will have to go without the suit (or some equivalent need or luxury). Instead of having a window and $50 he now has merely a window. Or, as he was planning to buy the suit that very afternoon, instead of having both a window and a suit he must be content with the window and no suit. If we think of him as a part of the community, the community has lost a new suit that might otherwise have come into being, and is just that much poorer.The glazier’s gain of business, in short, is merely the tailor’s loss of business. No new “employment” has been added. The people in the crowd were thinking only of two parties to the transaction, the baker and the glazier. They had forgotten the potential third party involved, the tailor. They forgot him precisely because he will not now enter the scene. They will see the new window in the next day or two. They will never see the extra suit, precisely because it will never be made. They see only what is immediately visible to the eye.“

—  Henry Hazlitt

„I do not mean to suggest that all those who call themselves monetarists make this unconscious assumption that an inflation involves this uniform rise of prices. But we may distinguish two schools of monetarism. The first would prescribe a monthly or annual increase in the stock of money just sufficient, in their judgment, to keep prices stable. The second school (which the first might dismiss as mere inflationists) wants a continuous increase in the stock of money sufficient to raise prices steadily by a "small" amount—2 or 3 per cent a year. These are the advocates of a "creeping" inflation. … I made a distinction earlier between the monetarists strictly so called and the "creeping inflationists." This distinction applies to the intent of their recommended policies rather than to the result. The intent of the monetarists is not to keep raising the price "level" but simply to keep it from falling, i. e., simply to keep it "stable." But it is impossible to know in advance precisely what uniform rate of money-supply increase would in fact do this. The monetarists are right in assuming that in a prospering economy, if the stock of money were not increased, there would probably be a mild long-run tendency for prices to decline. But they are wrong in assuming that this would necessarily threaten employment or production. For in a free and flexible economy prices would be falling because productivity was increasing, that is, because costs of production were falling. There would be no necessary reduction in real profit margins. The American economy has often been prosperous in the past over periods when prices were declining. Though money wage-rates may not increase in such periods, their purchasing power does increase. So there is no need to keep increasing the stock of money to prevent prices from declining. A fixed arbitrary annual increase in the money stock "to keep prices stable" could easily lead to a "creeping inflation" of prices.“

—  Henry Hazlitt

Publicité
Publicité
Prochain
Anniversaires aujourd'hui
Lillian Moller Gilbreth photo
Lillian Moller Gilbreth
psychologue et ingénieure industriel américaine 1878 - 1972
Priscilla Presley photo
Priscilla Presley
actrice américaine 1945
Nicolas Copernic photo
Nicolas Copernic6
médecin et astronome polonais de langue allemande (1473-156… 1473 - 1543
Duke Ellington photo
Duke Ellington
Musicien et compositeur de jazz américain 1899 - 1974
Un autre 49 ans aujourd'hui
Auteurs similaires
Hubert Beuve-Méry5
journaliste français
Albert Camus photo
Albert Camus93
écrivain et journaliste français
Hannah Arendt photo
Hannah Arendt27
philosophe américaine d'origine allemande
David Icke photo
David Icke8
écrivain britannique
 Colette photo
Colette49
romancière française