Are there any Marxist answers to Chicago/Austrian School economics?

[RadioRaheem84]

Never read a book that challenges Free to Choose by Milton Freedom or Capitalism and Freedom.

I bought Free to Lose by John Roemer but then I heard he was part of that new analytical school of Marxism so I never read it.

If anyone has something to say to the contrary about Free to Lose, please let me know.

[RadioRaheem84]

I found Not So Free to Choose by Elton Rayack. Is Rayack a liberal? Sounds like a good read none the less.

[l'Enfermé]

There are 3 main ones.

http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/index.htm
http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/index.htm
http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/index.htm

[Ocean Seal]

Never read a book that challenges Free to Choose by Milton Freedom or Capitalism and Freedom.

I bought Free to Lose by John Roemer but then I heard he was part of that new analytical school of Marxism so I never read it.

If anyone has something to say to the contrary about Free to Lose, please let me know.
Most of the Austrian criticisms are ethical and thus not worth losing any sleep over. Von Mises' ECP has been answered by many members here, along with Zeronowhere on redm_arx. I'm pretty sure that post is stickied. The main gist is that Mises proves himself wrong by ignoring his own argument that labor-time can replace money as a way to allocate higher order goods.

[Zeus the Moose]

These refer more to early Austrian economics, but Rudolf Hilferding wrote responses to Eugen Böhm-Bawerk, who was an early contributor to what has become Austrian economics. Hilferding wrote Böhm-Bawerk's Criticisms of Marx (http://marxists.org/archive/hilferding/1904/criticism/index.htm), which takes on Bohm-Bawerk directly, and Finance Capital (http://marxists.org/archive/hilferding/1910/finkap/index.htm), which I think is more focused on Austrian economics generally. Admittedly I have not read either of these, so I can't really be that helpful in terms of specific information, but Die Neue Zeit might have more info as he seems to know about more about Hilferding, at least. Bukharin also wrote a book (http://marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1927/leisure-economics/index.htm) which critiqued marginalist economics, which is one of the main roots of the Austrian school.

[TheCat'sHat]

I'm not sure what there really is to refute. I have a number of friends who are somewhat sever Austrians (one has referred to Friedman as a socialist) and their arguments are really moral ones that seem the be based on their conception of natural law. The actual economics of the system are more like ad hoc defenses of the moral arguments which, curiously enough, somehow always end by concluding that reactive policies that favor plutocrats like the gold standard and a neurotic hatred of even the most marginal inflation are all moral imperatives (interesting, isn't it that despite the Austrian claim that their policies are the only defense against corporatism Ludwig von Mises was funded by the Volker Fund and the Rockefeller Foundation).