patrick.net

Required reading for all of you Keynesians

indigenous says

In a nut shell Keynesians believe government can and should control the economy.

lol-I love it when posters completely bastardize Keynes. Perhaps you wouldn't be so dismissive if you actually understand his theories

tatupu70 says

indigenous says

In a nut shell Keynesians believe government can and should control the economy.

lol-I love it when posters completely bastardize Keynes. Perhaps you wouldn't be so dismissive if you actually understand his theories

I'm sure you understand the nuisances better than I.

Just look at the results that is all anyone needs to know.

indigenous says

I'm sure you understand the nuisances better than I.

Just look at the results that is all anyone needs to know.

Good idea--please share how you view the results. What problems do you attribute to Keynesian economics? Specifically--which actions, which laws, etc.

tatupu70 says

Good idea--please share how you view the results. What problems do you attribute to Keynesian economics? Specifically--which actions, which laws, etc.

You first

indigenous says

You first

I'm not the one who said the results is all anyone needs to know. Please elaborate on that statement. To which results do you refer?

Lets go with everything to the right of the graph is Keynesian and everything to the left is Free Market

One hundred years after its creation, consumer prices are about 30 times higher than what they were in 1913.

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-inflation-since-1775-2013-1

Average per capita income was around $7k in 1933 Per capita income is around 43k in 2012 by the above it should be around 210k

http://www.demographia.com/db-pc1929.pdf

1933 was when FDR confiscated the gold

indigenous says

Just look at the results that is all anyone needs to know.

The results of what? No one has implemented Keynes theories. They only implemented the part where government spends. Perhaps you should actually read and understand Keynes before you comment.

indigenous says

One hundred years after its creation, consumer prices are about 30 times higher than what they were in 1913.

And the wages are how much higher?

bob2356 says

The results of what? No one has implemented Keynes theories. They only implemented the part where government spends. Perhaps you should actually read and understand Keynes before you comment.

That is a fair and unfair argument at the same time. When you have a "theory" where you start with money printing, then - if you have any hands-on experience of how things work in practice - you would immediately realize that the rest of the theory will never be implemented. Drop a helicopter full of money onto NYC but tell the people they have to equally share it and "pay it back" eventually and see how far they will listen. Same goes for controlled money printing and special interests. Hence that "theory" is worthless in practice.

bob2356 says

The results of what? No one has implemented Keynes theories. They only implemented the part where government spends. Perhaps you should actually read and understand Keynes before you comment.

I understand plenty. Actions are what I look at, the hell with the theory.

Besides it must be hard to get one's head that far up his ass.

Statue of John Maynard Keynes

indigenous says

Actions are what I look at, the hell with the theory.

Well then why the hell would you call it Keynesian if you know it's not? Call it politicians spending too much on defense because that's what it is.

mell says

When you have a "theory" where you start with money printing, then

If that was the start of his theory, you might have a point.

tatupu70 says

Well then why the hell would you call it Keynesian if you know it's not? Call it politicians spending too much on defense because that's what it is.

That is non sequitur WW 2 was about 10 year after Keynes started his perversion of the U.S.

Keynes argued against a return to the gold standard after the war.

How come I can't see David's comment here?

tatupu70 says

Well then why the hell would you call it Keynesian if you know it's not? Call it politicians spending too much on defense because that's what it is.

Because Keynesianism provides the intellectual cover for the politicians doing the looting in western democracies, just like Marxism provided the intellectual cover for the politicians doing the looting in the former eastern bloc countries in the 20th century. Before that, before even the western enlightened societies emerged, it was the Divine Right of King theory that provided the intellectual cover for the looting.

See, while wealth and power is never equally distributed in any society just like people are born with different degrees of beauty and talent . . . the systemic use of force to loot the vast cross section of the society by a tiny minority of elite always requires an intellectual fog cover (lest there be immediate revolt). Keynsianism provides that cover and mind fog to keep the masses down.

Reality says

See, while wealth and power is never equally distributed in any society just like people are born with different degrees of beauty and talent . . . the systemic use of force to loot the vast cross section of the society by a tiny minority of elite always requires an intellectual fog cover (lest there be immediate revolt). Keynsianism provides that cover and mind fog to keep the masses down.

Yep. Well said.

mell says

Reality says

See, while wealth and power is never equally distributed in any society just like people are born with different degrees of beauty and talent . . . the systemic use of force to loot the vast cross section of the society by a tiny minority of elite always requires an intellectual fog cover (lest there be immediate revolt). Keynsianism provides that cover and mind fog to keep the masses down.

Yep. Well said.

Ditto the Yep

Reality says

Because Keynesianism provides the intellectual cover for the politicians doing
the looting in western democracies,

What in the world are you talking about? Keynes definitely didn't advocate spending 50% of the budget on defense. And which politicians are actually claiming that Keynes is guiding their decisions anyway?

Reality says

See, while wealth and power is never equally distributed in any society just
like people are born with different degrees of beauty and talent . . . the
systemic use of force to loot the vast cross section of the society by a tiny
minority of elite always requires an intellectual fog cover (lest there be
immediate revolt). Keynsianism provides that cover and mind fog to keep the
masses down.

Of course wealth isn't equally distributed, but you must understand that the tendency is for it to become more unequal over time unless there is intervention to redistribute the wealth. That's what government's role should be.

But I still don't know what you are talking about regarding the cover or mind fog--that's just a BS talking point.

tatupu70 says

What in the world are you talking about? Keynes definitely didn't advocate spending 50% of the budget on defense.

Keynes advocated the theory that government spending on anything and everything has equal stimulative effect on the economy. When such a policy perspective is adopted, the natural result is out-sized military spending: simply because government waste on military spending is not as obvious as government waste on everyday goods and services that the consumers/voters are familiar with.

And which politicians are actually claiming that Keynes is guiding their decisions anyway?

Every single politician who has advocated government spending as a "stimulus" to the economy. That's the essence of Keynesian prescription.

tatupu70 says

Of course wealth isn't equally distributed, but you must understand that the tendency is for it to become more unequal over time unless there is intervention to redistribute the wealth. That's what government's role should be.

You have it exactly backwards! A free market place where individuals make economic decisions for him/herself tend to enable rapid capital obsolescence and replacement by new forms of capital favored by the individual consumers. Government intervention tend to entrench existing big players. Personal computers would not have emerged if the government had been in control of the computer industry . . . and indeed both Japan and Soviet Union spent almost all their computer engineering talent on mainframes. Bureaucrats tend to think along the lines "nobody gets fired for buying IBM." Government is a monopoly entrenching force. That's why the big family names of the late 19th and early 20th century turned to politics and central banking, in order to preserve their status.

tatupu70 says

But I still don't know what you are talking about regarding the cover or mind fog--that's just a BS talking point.

Keynesianism is pseudo-religious myth that serves to keep down the exploited masses. The primary beneficiaries of Keynesian redistribution schemes (government spending and borrowing) are the well connected cronies who get the money first, at the expense of the masses who get the newly printed money later.