Keynes - good or bad? Quick 101 please if anyone fancies it (capitalism, borrow)

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

John Maynard Keynes seems to get a bashing these days.

what's so wrong with his theories and have they been proved wrong?

I'd like to do some compare and contrast, freemarket, democracy, socialism, libertarianism etc.. and see how Keynes fits in

I need to be educated, thanks

[UsernameAlreadyTaken]

People tend to worship their economist of choice. Unfortunately, no one single economist is right about everything, or even very much at all. What works for one part of the world doesn't work in another, thanks to culture, environment, government, or about any other factor you can imagine, yet most economists try to suggest (for lack of a better word) that their ideas will fix everything everywhere.

[chuckmann]

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

John Maynard Keynes seems to get a bashing these days.

what's so wrong with his theories and have they been proved wrong?

I'd like to do some compare and contrast, freemarket, democracy, socialism, libertarianism etc.. and see how Keynes fits in

I need to be educated, thanks

OK I will bite... to the best of my ability.

Keynes wrote his great book The General Theory Of Employment, Interest, And Money I believe published in 1936. Prior to that, he had met with Roosevelt and have convinced him that government spending could stimulate the economy by 1) stimulating the economy and 2) encouraging the private sector to get back into the game.

Place this into context. From October 1929 (great crash) through 1933, government spending remained constant (more or less) According to previous economic theory, interest rates would decline and business would have the incentive to hire people at very favorable (low) wages because interest rates were low and therefore there was incentive to hire and produce. Unfortunately, that did not happenl

Keynes' research told him that an economy can remain at equilibrium despite low interest rates and massive unemployment. Why? Because businesses will sit on the sidelines (even as they do today) waiting for some kind of trigger.

Keynes would never have supported the kinds of massive government spending that we see today. Instead he would have examined what was really going on, and derived other answers.

During the period 1934-1942, if we learned nothing else, we learned that massive federal spending cannot encourage business to invest. All government can do is participate in a massive war which 1) takes labor off the market and 2) kills off surplus labor for that time when peace arrives.

Keynes is much maligned by the right wing ideologues who take him out of context and are unable to comprehend what Keynes proved. He is also over rated by the left wing ideologues for the same reasons.

I leave you all with this: There comes a time when the wealthy privileged class becomes SO rich, SO powerful, that they see themselves as gods, and the rest of us as slaves. At that time there will be some who will serve those gods as priests and house slaves, thinking that they have a route to immortality for themselves, blaming the slaves for their inability to become gods too. How wrong they will find themselves ... but by then it will be too late. Welcome to the machine!

[Seeker5in1]

Keynesian economics: counterfeit money, inflate the currency, and pay back cheaper money than you borrow. Austrian economics: back money with gold, and if you ain't got it, don't buy it.

[gwynedd1]

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

John Maynard Keynes seems to get a bashing these days.

what's so wrong with his theories and have they been proved wrong?

I'd like to do some compare and contrast, freemarket, democracy, socialism, libertarianism etc.. and see how Keynes fits in

I need to be educated, thanks

Why not read him yourself? Haven't you noticed by now that second hand interpretations are BS?

The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money by John Maynard Keynes

Otherwise you will become biased, and not educated.

[gwynedd1]

Originally Posted by Seeker5in1

Keynesian economics: counterfeit money, inflate the currency, and pay back cheaper money than you borrow. Austrian economics: back money with gold, and if you ain't got it, don't buy it.

Yeah that's just complete nonsense. The Keynes era was under a gold standard. Hayek who is considered Austrian, was not for a gold standard. Try looking into the debates he had with Rothbard. Then he would not be for our gold standards since he hated fractional reserve banking.


Then we have to deal with the Hitler problem. Lew Rockwell, I recall, recently said the Fed allows the government to create a huge war machines. So the rejection of Keynes is not based upon his view on money but in the power implicit in it. And now back to Hitler. Every other country tried to keep their gold standard while he printed money for war production, and almost wiped out everyone until they did the same. How do you stick with a money standard when a gun is pointed at your head? The communists had their ideals to until "war communism" aka just another run of the mill form of state capitalism.

[gwynedd1]

Originally Posted by chuckmann

I leave you all with this: There comes a time when the wealthy privileged class becomes SO rich, SO powerful, that they see themselves as gods, and the rest of us as slaves. At that time there will be some who will serve those gods as priests and house slaves, thinking that they have a route to immortality for themselves, blaming the slaves for their inability to become gods too. How wrong they will find themselves ... but by then it will be too late. Welcome to the machine!

What you are describing is an effective private government. I hold to the big gang theory of government. If you remove one, the next one moves in. The Mensheviks were actually quick free until the Bolsheviks mopped up and filled the vacuum of power.

[chuckmann]

Originally Posted by gwynedd1

What you are describing is an effective private government. I hold to the big gang theory of government. If you remove one, the next one moves in. The Mensheviks were actually quick free until the Bolsheviks mopped up and filled the vacuum of power.

Well, I suppose the proper debating question is to ask if the Roman Empire or any of those other old Divinely ruled empires were "effective", depending upon how you define "effective"?

BTW I like your "big gang" theory.

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

ok, thanks for replies, I'll be back later

[evilnewbie]

Keynes is similar but also significantly different than "modern" keynes is today... You need to read the book but also understand what keynesian is today... Which is bigger government and total intervention, which wasn't what keynes wanted but what his beliefs have "become".... Or should i say evolved into...