The annotated fight of the century Keynes vs Hayek 2

[whoo689]

And btw, why are these videos ONLY about Hayek and Keynes?? I mean, come on, their 'debate' started over half a century ago! They're certainly NOT the icons they once were. There have been PLENTY of additional economists who've weighed in and made many important 'discoveries' or claims as well as further research debunking or further proving certain economic claims. Or coming up with new theories

The idea that it's ONLY about Keynes vs. Hayek is just ignorant. Fucking libertarians...

[whoo689]

In reality, however, we must do a mixture of BOTH (where appropriate) for maximum prosperity. It must be done on a case-by-case basis. This is the problem with ideology, esp. economic ones- they can't account for outliers or try to explain them away instead of admitting that absolutism is foolhardy.

[jimmyt3411]

@whoo689 Nonsense, it is about ideology, you either want government to tinker with our economy or you don't, you either think cutting taxes will be good for the economy or you don't, you either think that regulating the economy works or you don't. "...instead of admitting absolutism is foolhardy", do you absolutely believe that absolutism is foolhardy? If you do then you've contradicted yourself, if you don't then you don't know if what your saying is true. Learn economics/philosophy.

[whoo689]

Hayek and Austrian economists in general are morons who have subconsciously replaced REAL economics with THEIR IDEOLOGY but thought that the two were somehow the same and tried to fool the rest of the world into believing their market fundamentalist nonsense.

But videos like this present a false dichotomy- that either you have to fully support Keynesian government interventions or Hayekian "get the gov't out" deregulation, taxes cut, cut spending, etc.

[jimmyt3411]

@whoo689 There is nothing wrong with ideology as long as it makes sense. And yes economics and philosophy do coincide and require principles of thought and formulation of ideology. Unless if you like contradicting yourself, the question IS whether government intervention is efficient or not, whether centralizing economic management of works or decentralizing it allowing private firms to to manage them actually produces results. There is no middle ground something either is or it isn't.

[zezekable]

You, dear friend, have no understanding at all of what Hayek's message is. He's the champion of competition. Have you ever read the road to serfdom? I doubt so, but you should read it so you'd stop wasting time from posting such pointless so-called ''annotated'' videos.

[deadpieface]

Didn't Keynes say himself he was wrong?

[gtznh]

To the claims about Hayek Being uneducated:

He won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1978, was awarded the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991

Doctorate in Law, Political Science, and studied philosophy, psychology, and economics at the university of Vienna.

he was also a professor at the London School of Economics, University of Chicago, and University of Freiburg, (University of Salzburg too but only for a short period of time)

[Griezz]

Annot 5 - Watch the labels! While Hayek would probably agree to the title "conservative", he has nothing to do with what is the modern Republican party. Also, it is rather silly to attack a person based on what someone else did, merely because of a perceived similarity of political ideologies. If Hayek didn't like the idea of government leaders trying to dictate a national economy, why should he feel differently about private business leaders doing it?

[Griezz]

Annot 4 - Actually, from his perspective, Hayek is right. See, any factory that manufacturers tanks is not making cars or ovens; any soldiers sent to "the front" is not at home, farming the land or working the factory floor. In economics, those are considered lost opportunities. What you're ignoring is how many shortages there were in the war years, not to mention that any customers the US had paid with money that the US lent them first.

[Griezz]

Annot 4 - Wars only destroy? Actually, from his perspective, Hayek is right. See, any factory that manufacturers tanks is not making cars or ovens; any soldiers sent to "the front" is not at home, farming the land or working the factory floor. In economics, those are considered lost opportunities. What you're ignoring is how many shortages there were in the war years, not to mention that any customers the US had paid with money that the US lent them first.

[Griezz]

Annot 3 - this was just the opening, so I wouldn't expect immediate proofs... especially when Keynes' claim that the "recession" ended in (20)09. It did not. The US economy is still hurting. Anyways, the conceit Hayek was talking about was that the top-down approach tries to impose a single solution for an entire economy; that does nothing for areas here that particular solution does nothing or hurts worse.

[Griezz]

Annot 2 - Actually, BOTH government spending AND revenue are equally important in discussing government operations. Neither can be said to be more important than the other. Also, bad spelling aside, the mere fact that someone went to school does not grant wisdom.

[Griezz]

Annot 1 - Actually, just like in the first video, I saw the opening scene simply as demonstrating that Keynes is well known, while most people are far less aware of Hayek. (Of course, these two videos have helped that a little.)

[Griezz]

Annot 1 - Actually, just like in the first video, I saw the opening scene simply as demonstrating that Keynes is well known, while most people are far less aware of Hayek. (Of course, these two videos have helped that a little.)

Annot 2 - Actually, BOTH government spending AND revenue are equally important in discussing government operations. Neither can be said to be more important than the other. Also, bad spelling aside, the mere fact that someone went to school does not grant wisdom

[Griezz]

Re: Annot 1 - Actually, just like in the first video, I saw the opening scene simply as demonstrating that Keynes is well known, while most people are far less aware of Hayek. (Of course, these two videos have helped that a little.)

Re: Annot 2 - Actually, BOTH government spending AND revenue are equally important in discussing government operations. Neither can be said to be more important than the other. Also, bad spelling aside, the mere fact that someone went to school does not grant wisdom

[Griezz]

Re: Annot 1 - Actually, just like in the first video, I saw the opening scene simply as demonstrating that Keynes is well known, while most people are far less aware of Hayek. (Of course, these two videos have helped that a little.)

Re: Annot 2 - Actually, BOTH government spending AND revenue are equally important in discussing government operations. Neither can be said to be more important than the other. Also, bad spelling aside, the mere fact that someone went to school does not grant wisdom.

[Azaurus1]

most of your argument assumes neocons are genuine conservatives. True fiscal conservatives are hostile to spending of both parties.

[0spiker]

snab 2 How many drop outs will tell you there choice to drop out was bad due to a lack of funding. The drop out knows if he wants his bottle of skull popper, he'd better get to the packy on time and have the right amount of money, knows the I didn't collect enough cans today (revenue) story wont get him ever larger bottles of the good stuff. Those who went to university "FRO FIVE... " still don't understand that basic idea.

[0spiker]

Snab, perhaps you need to stop huffing your used undies. If declining revenue is the issue, why does spending keep increasing? If your weekly paycheck keeps getting smaller, do you go out and spend larger amounts of money?

Yes the high school drop out knows better how to spend HIS money (judging from your spelling that's you) why because folks who went to university FRO FIVE.... tend to hold onto bad ideas for much longer than any self respecting drop out.

[0spiker]

re:Snabkebab whoever annotated the video needs to get a sense of humor. The opening scene merely reveals Keynes stature. Everyone knows who he is. He was a very influential man in his lifetime and is far better known than Hayek. Yes it's a poke at Hayek's obscurity. One doesn't need to be an ideological gladiator all the time. Get a life. When you fart, do you blame conservatives because it smells?

[KeoniPhoenix]

This is a poor rebuttal of Hayek. In order to have a convincing argument you need to provide clear evidence to support your side. Unfortunately this is a rehash of Keynes' supporters. Assertions without basis and fallacies is no argument.

[mdetting]

"That top-down approach is a fatal conceit" refers to Hayek's famous book "The fatal conceit: The errors of socialism". With "top-down approach", Hayek means "central planning by the goverment, trying to steer the economy". And Keynes' view that the government should spend more money to create employment can be seen as a mild form of socialism.