Apartment of Empress Maria Theresa, Schönbrunn Palace, unknown artist of the Austrian school, undated.
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from Canada
seen from India

seen from Canada

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Oman
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from Poland
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Italy
seen from China

seen from Germany
Apartment of Empress Maria Theresa, Schönbrunn Palace, unknown artist of the Austrian school, undated.
The Bacchantes by Austrian School
Description
A "bacchante" is a female follower or priestess of Bacchus, the Roman god of wine. The term is most often used in classical mythology to describe a maenad, a woman who participates in ecstatic, wild rituals. The term also refers to a wide range of artworks, including paintings, sculptures, and decorative reliefs, that depict these followers of Bacchus, often shown in a state of frenzy or revelry.
Austrian School
The Empress Maria Theresa (1717 - 1780) as a Widow
Artist: Austrian School (after Joseph Ducreux) (French, 1735-1802)
Date: 1770-1779
Medium: Oil on canvas
Collection: National Trust Collections, London, United Kingdom
Empress Maria Theresa
Maria Theresa (Maria Theresia Walburga Amalia Christina; 13 May 1717 – 29 November 1780) was ruler of the Habsburg monarchy from 1740 until her death in 1780, and the only woman to hold the position suo jure (in her own right). She was the sovereign of Austria, Hungary, Croatia, Bohemia, Transylvania, Slavonia, Mantua, Milan, Moravia, Galicia and Lodomeria, Dalmatia, the Austrian Netherlands, Carinthia, Carniola, Gorizia and Gradisca, Lusatia, Styria and Parma. By marriage, she was Duchess of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany, and Holy Roman Empress.
The disrobing of Christ, Austrian School, 17th century
One of America's top social scientists on what has changed since he sat down with Reason 38 years ago.
“We have a seemingly quite different president now, Donald Trump. Yet in this regard there is a striking similarity in his dismissal of personal achievement. He says to Jeff Bezos, "You didn't create Amazon. Subsidies from the Post Office did." He takes that as a premise for threatening firms and even whole sectors of the economy with a variety of ad hoc regulatory attacks.
That's true. The fact that we don't have people who are educated to be able to analyze arguments but who are swept along by rhetoric is one of the reasons that allows people to get away with these kinds of things.
(…)
Thoughts on the Trump trade war?
Oh my gosh, an utter disaster. I happen to believe that the Smoot-Hawley tariffs had more to do with setting off the great depression of the '30s than the stock market crash. Unemployment never reached double digits in any of the 12 months that followed the crash of October 1929, but it hit double digits within six months of passage of Smoot-Hawley, and stayed there for a decade.
What about the view by President Trump that other countries are ripping us off by running trade surpluses?
It's pathetic. The very phrase "trade surpluses" gives half a story. There are countries that supply mainly goods, physical goods, and there are other things like services that other countries provide, and the United States gets a lot of money from providing services. To talk about one part of the trading and ignore the other part fails to understand that money is money no matter whether it's from goods or services.
When you set off a trade war, like any other war, you have no idea how that's going to end. You're going to be blindsided by all kinds of consequences. You do not make America great again by raising the price to Americans, which is what a tariff does.”
Political boundaries of nations may be important for other reasons, but they have no economic meaning whatever. The upshot is that protectio
“The upshot is that protectionism is not only nonsense, but dangerous nonsense, destructive of all economic prosperity. We are not, if we were ever, a world of self-sufficient farmers. The market economy is one vast latticework throughout the world, in which each individual, each region, each country, produces what he or it is best at, most relatively efficient in, and exchanges that product for the goods and services of others. Without the division of labor and the trade based upon that division, the entire world would starve. Coerced restraints on trade—such as protectionism—cripple, hobble, and destroy trade, the source of life and prosperity. Protectionism is simply a plea that consumers, as well as general prosperity, be hurt so as to confer permanent special privilege upon groups of inefficient producers, at the expense of competent firms and of consumers. But it is a peculiarly destructive kind of bailout, because it permanently shackles trade under the cloak of patriotism.”
Economic knowledge necessarily leads to liberalism. On the one hand, it demonstrates that there are only two possibilities for the property problem of a society based on the division of labor: private property or public property in the means of production. The so-called middle of the road of “regulated” property is either illogical, because it does not lead to the intended goal and accomplishes nothing but a disruption of the capitalistic production process, or it must lead to complete socialization of the means of production. On the other hand, it demonstrates what has been perceived clearly only recently, that a society based on public property is not viable because it does not permit monetary calculation and thus rational economic action. Therefore, economic knowledge is blocking the way to socialistic and syndicalistic ideologies that prevail all over the world. And this explains the war that is waged everywhere against economics and economists. _______________
Ludwig von Mises
Austrian School A Martyr Saint
Carved wood, paint, h: 32 cm, 18th century