My name is Isaac Marmolejo and I currently study Economics and Political Science at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque.
This blog contains my opinions on philosophy, politics, government, and economics. I consider myself an Austrian economist with my main influence being Ludwig Lachmann. With this in mind, I share Lachmann’s critical views of libertarianism and neoclassical economics and how it has degraded Austrian economics as a whole.
The main purpose of this blog is to encourage progress and critique the current state of Austrian economics from a Radical Subjectivist perspective. I believe Austrian economics can still benefit greatly by understanding Austrians like Ludwig Lachmann, Jack Wiseman, and semi-Austrian George Shackle. These men have great importance in Austrian economics because of their distrust to all neoclassical economics and the importance of subjectivism.
I also write posts on American history, which is a subject that interests me.
My email is: isaac.v.marmolejo@gmail.com
The Radical Subjectivist 
I consider Lachmann, Knight, and Post-Keynesian economics to be antithetical to the UCLA price theory tradition. The former continually emphasize that other things can matter in the world we live in, while the latter ignore everything except applications of supply and demand graphs.
I do not really concern myself with the UCLA price theory (actually I know very little about price theory in the UCLA tradition) but Alchian’s work on ‘information costs’ and unemployment (his paper:”Information Costs, Pricing and Resource Unemployment” ) and Demsetz on transaction costs is simply amazing.
Fair: I’m less critical if we’re talking about just transaction costs. They are important. One issue with that is though, you may have ten possible explanations of something you observe. One cites transactions costs, contorting itself a little to do so. The others are “sociological” and other things economists don’t really understand. Or perhaps they result from a lack of knowledge in the Kirznerian sense. We blind ourselves by overemphasizing transaction costs – though, again, it is important.
And that is fair to say. I agree that transaction costs are not everything but are very important. Out of interest though, do you have any good reads on UCLA price theory. I love your blog BTW
I actually don’t know many good specific criticisms on UCLA price theory. I just generally want to throw things when I hear the theoretical arguments. My intuition is probably the result of Taleb’s narrative fallacy found in The Black Swan and also my belief in the empirical relevance of x-inefficiency. But those two things are also my response to almost anything, so take that with a grain of salt.