This guys is full of shit, i bet he's some clueless car salesman who thought he knew a lot about little. He should talk to Paul Krugman who would meticulously explain to him how Keynesian theories have saved western society more then once.
@2020starman how is keynesian economics against Glass Steagall? In fact many economists of the keynesian persuasion like Joseph Stiglitz and Pual Vocker are aganist the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. Please stick to arguing the topic and stop trying to discredit the person posing the proposition.
Keynesian economics is a perfect scam set up by IMF founder Maynard Keynes
Its monetary policy you can manipulate the markets, hide money, and steal from.Keyseain economics and BEN Bernake must be stopped .its always been a complete failure.Its a Washingtons honey pot
Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOOL ?YOU ALL ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS
cutting taxes is not a stimulus it's simply policy...also Keynesian policy is primarily based on monetary policy, not the aforementioned fiscal policy. You really don't seem very intelligent regarding economic theory, at least your trying to teach simple Keynes instead of something like Austrian.
The simulation is not false as the recession has come about due to a decrease in consumption from economic agents pessimistic out look, there fore the increase is cash would not only boost there confidence in the short term to mitigate the effects of the recession but also return the consumers confidence quicker to the long run equilibrium that is that path it was on before the recession or shock accrued.
@Jason93609 Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
@Krugmanistheking on this assumption. If you want, I can draw out the AD, AS curves, and show you the shifts so that it is easier to understand. I have narrowed you down to one line and that is that people are not rational. No shit sherlock, thats why a central planning system doesn't work. That's why your over simplified ideas of injecting money through central, on the assumption of how much money you believe is required.
@Krugmanistheking To say that my examples are not relevant is complete ignorance. Look at every single good and service ever produced, over time production becomes more efficient and the cost per unit goes down. Cars, books, TVs, furniture, radios, calculators, trains, food. Thus the real price has been lowered. Of course this is applicable to the macro scale, this is the reality of the world! Now your argument comes down to rationality, how ironic. Everything in keynsian economics is based
@Krugmanistheking That is news to me my friend. I was not aware in the US they didn't measure inflation with the CPI. My example is completely relevant, you should really do some econs 101. Over an economy is able to produce goods and services more effectively, and thus lowering the real price. Every single good and service in the world has decreased in price over time, there is a shift out to the productions possibility curve. This is the definition of economic growth.
@Krugmanistheking lastly, yes Keynes was right when he advocated the borrowing of money to purchase capital. He was however completely against inflation and borrowing for consumption as you probably already know, from his work 'The Economic Consequences of the Peace'. In his last publication after his death he also noted the risks in central banking and was first and foremost a believer in free markets, as he was a huge follower of Adam Smith.
@Krugmanistheking The only way you can borrow out of debt, is to borrow more money to purchase capital so you can increase your ability to pay back debt, ie your productive capacity. The US does not do this, it borrows more money, and then spends it on consumption goods, which are made in Chindia. You will come to see that an economy grows through savings and under consumption, while you're at it look at Austrian school predictions of 08 vs the keynsians and the same for every other bubble.
@Krugmanistheking Economic growth, the increase in real income so that an economy can increase its ability to satisfy its wants is not caused by an increase in spending, but an increase in productive capacity, as you may remember from the productions possibility curve. But an increase in the money supply by central banks is a false means of economic growth, as it does not reflect the quantity of money demanded by people to invest. People save and underconsume to get rid of debt, not borrow more.
@Krugmanistheking productive capacity of the US economy remains relatively constant, and the new money created is malinvested, such as we saw from the NASDAQ bubble and the housing bubble. Without central banks, banks would have to rely on savings and under consumption to give out loans, so that capital can be purchased and wise investments, or unwise investments can be made. The difference is that banks have to actually have people saving and under consuming so that they can lend out money,
@Krugmanistheking Of course this is not where the majority of demand pull inflation comes from. Look at the figures for the historic money supply yourself, available at the feds website. The increase in the inflation, demand pull inflation, is caused by the increase in the money supply by monetary policy. Of course GDP is higher, because people have spent more money and more jobs have been created, but one thing still remains. As the pool of money grows exponentially, to service debt, the
@Krugmanistheking When a bank lends someone money, to purchase capital so that they can get a better paid job, they expect the money back. When the person pays back the money there is an increase in the supply of money, and there is an increase in the supply of capital. Thus an economy has caused demand pull inflation through the increase in the supply of money. He is now able to earn a higher income and buy more things.
@Krugmanistheking This can come about through fractional reserve banking, monetary or fiscal policy. In a world without central banks, private banks can only lend money that people have saved there, to invest and buy capital goods, thus increasing the productive capacity of a nation. Governments could only borrow to a limit, as money would the increase in the money supply from fractional reserve banking from productivity is relatively slow.
@Krugmanistheking effect on the CPI has been negligible. Sometimes we have cost push inflation because of natural disasters, but in general, economies have a decrease in costs to goods and services because of productivity so this is not the primary source of inflation. Now this leads to demand pull, where given that AS is constant an increase in the demand for goods and services at a macro scale means that they are more expensive.
@Krugmanistheking Economic growth by definition is the increase in the economy to satisfy its wants, by an increase in real income. When the cost of goods and services goes down due to productivity we have both an increase in economic growth and deflation. We also have increase in employment. Now where does inflation come from? There is cost push and demand pull inflation. It is quite true to say we have experienced some cost push inflation as of late due to the rise in commodities but the effec
@Krugmanistheking Look at almost every single good and service that has every existed; cars, TVs, aeroplanes, computers, furniture, etc. Over time the production costs decrease as a result in productivity, improvement in technology etc. So the price of the goods over time becomes lower, we have a deflationary effect, and the result is increase in profits to firms, as more people can afford the good at the lower price, and they hire more workers.
@Krugmanistheking is most often associated with todays system, works which laid the foundations for Friedman and the like. My examples are not false analogies, they are representative on a macro scale, as most econs 101 students would know, through the circular flow of income mode. Over time, when the productive capacity of an economy increases, the real cost to consumers of goods and services, made by firms is lower. By definition we have a deflationary effect.
@KrugmanisthekingThe arrogance to criticise? That astounds me, criticism is the highest level of intellectual pursuit, and judging by your username it is the threat to your ideology that concerns you more than the pursuit of truth.Now on to the matter of economics. You can play semantics all day, and I myself am a thorough academic of Keynes and you are right to say it was not his ideologies that we see today in practice. However the mainstream neo-liberal monetarist based economics we see today
Keynsianism and monetarism got us into this mess. The idea that you cant have deflation, economic growth, and low unemployment simultaneously is absurd. Take, cars, planes, TVs they have all decreased in real costs as a result of increase in productivity, thus real income has increased, demand increases, firms hire more labour, so we have economic growth, deflation and higher employment!! You can only borrow your way out of debt, if the debt is to increase ability to pay back debt!!
What a retard. Keynes very clearly states, in The Economic Consequences of the Peace, that inflation poses one of the most dangerous threats to the social order. To imply that Keynesianism is pro-inflation is retarded. It's all about counter-cyclical government spending, inflating when the economy is weak and deflating when it is strong.
I reckon i can sum this up very quickly. Ok when the level of unemployment rises which often corresponds with economic slow down, the government pumps money into the economy by way of running a fiscal debt, this stimulates the economy and creats growth, however when economic growth is at a good level the government will run a fiscal surplus which wards of inflation because it removes the excess of money in the economy that would de value the dollar. If i missed any thing please comment
So if we sent 2000 dollars to every American we would all be spending more money. Okay well lets just do that and see what happens. One word INFLATION. It will not make it better at all and most of all it will create what we are in today. You can't just stimulate the economy, there is no "it" at all, the economy is organic. But Keynesian economics does not even condone what supposed Keynesian theories we follow today!
I seriously doubt this guy has read much of Keynes if any of his main work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. I bet this guy doesn't know what is the cause of fluctuations in employment or the same, what determines the volume of employment at any given time? If he can't give a simple concise answer he's never read Keynes.
@banky41 its all dependent on thing like taxes ect, and wot value he recieves on the resale, because in any transaction there is always a level of dead weight loss,
Take a look at these controversial videos ...>>" Obama deception" and "Loose change" Via You Tube.... then do some of you're own research to cross check the videos .. millions of people are off main news ...
You are so wrong about Keynes. Nobody has disporven Keynes General Theory of Employment. The only thing liberterians do is change the assumptions. That is not a proof.
I've seen some seriously idiotic comments on this thread! Read some Hayek and if you're smart enough you'll understand the dangers of central planning and the benefits of free market competition. I doubt most of you could understand Hayek though....
@PonguigPeopinn "Government employment is needed to maintain what little production still exists" And pay them with what? Money from the printing press? Or do they resort to robbing Peter to give Paul a job?
@PonguigPeopinn unemployment exists because of minimum wage laws and a few other factors that prevent market wages from falling to their actual supply and demand level. It could also be in some cases, that if wages are at market levels, that people would rather wait out a recession or live on government or charity money than work at a job that is to terrible or pays to little. Either way, how is the government supposed to fix that?
the idiotically oversimplified understanding of economics displayed by strawmannings of Keynes are so rampant it's horrifying. Never once do these people stop to examine their assumptions, like the constantly implied assumption of perfect competition. Free markets do not compete perfectly. There are so many failures in the free market, I'll list until I run out of chars.
@mortacrify government isn't competetive at all. Maybe every 4 years 10 to 20 percent of the mostly uneducated population can select a new leader who can appoint a few bureaucrats to run the entire economy. And somehow that is supposed to be a more optimal solution than letting private firms compete in the real world on how well they fill their economic niche. Sure it has limitations (though I would argue they could all be overcome anyways), but if that applies to all other systems also.
Mark of a great educator: Teach them that an ideology is wrong and that you're right using a really badly put together analogy that doesn't explain anything about Keynesian Economics or why WWII saved the US from the Great Depression, or how Hitler rebuilt Germany by spending government money on creating a massive military. Genius.
But without the stimulus, the speedboat business owner likely wouldn't have made enough sales to keep his business alive anyways. His business ultimately failed because of his decision making. Either way you look at it, the stimulus at least kept his business running a little while longer than it would've without it.
“Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics. There is scarcely anything to object to in it and there is much to applaud.”
It doesn't matter what model anyone follows anywhere, from a monarchy, to a Republic to a Dictatorship,, or a Religious nuthouse, the fact is that 5% of the people, hold 95% of the wealth. The rest are left to fight for the crumbs.
Kenysian economics reinforces the fascistic elements in our gov, the reason all that wealth is at the top is because we have centralized banks and people controlling other peoples wealth. In a free market at least, people can earn at the sweat of their brow and keep their savings and not have them stolen by wall street bankseters.
@RyanR3volution Yes but the people in the city, the judiciary, the government and in my case (England), the supposed upper middle class and dare I say it without choking, the upper class; their lives are all geared from birth to attain a certain level of wealth and power over and above the so called working class. I am neither socialist nor communist, but I see the utter inequality in status between our education, expectation and life achievement between us.........and them.
Then why support a system which gives the gov (curropt) a easy way to give money to their pals. Free markets are what bring advances and are the most fair systems. Free markets reward people for their work and keep government under control. Giving gov power with anything is a dastardly mistake.
@RyanR3volution I agree but it's not that simple. I my working lifetime I have known wage freezes, pensioners have a fuel allowance but then they will decrease other benefits to pay for it. So as with most other systems they give with one hand, but take away with the other. Do you have the opportunity to have your savings in a tax free, offshore account?, or is it other local institutions paying you near zero interest for your savings.
Well I do not support taxing anyones income because your income is your business and the gov does not own it. The Federal Reserve is responsible for the dangerous 0% interest rates which hurt the US economy on top of that they print more money, with no value.
I just think, no matter how well intentioned gov interference in the economy does nothing but creates booms and busts and distorts the natural order of things while hurting us all.
There is, sadly, a wealth of this type of video on YouTube. Corporations and the wealthy hate Keynes because his policies lead to a far more egalitarian wealth structure - something those who would exploit inequalities for profit despise - even as they lead to a healthier economic model overall.
It is the Classical Economics model that has been debunked, not only by economists such as Krugman, Holland, Reich et al, but by history itself.
This is pro-corporatist propaganda, not a real class.
i don't think that your giving a full understanding here. You havn't distinguished between NOMINAL and REAL GDP. when money's printed, the price level goes up, so nominal GDP rises (like you said), but real GDP stays constant. And all economic models use real GDP, nominal values are distorted by inflation
This is the most amateur explanation of Keynesian economics I've heard. Keynes is rolling in his grave right now. Just for your info... Joe Producer is going bankrupt anyways, hence then need for the STIMULUS. And Obama's stimulus was not ALL created money, a third of it was in the form of tax cuts.
Clearly the presenter doesn't understand Keynesian economics, heck he doesn't even understand the difference between deficit vs non-deficit spending.
According to Keynes, government should run a surplus doing growth periods and deficits during recessions. (i.e. Canada has a huge deficit at the moment, but 10 years of surplus previously)
As a non-American I must say your Federal reserve is a joke, and a very bad one at that.
@cappercastro Bush imposed Keynesian economics AND HANDED OFF TO OBAMA to rip off the people.. If you check history.. keyseain economics was some what successful during the depression and after ww 11 ..We live in a different time.. No growth opportunity .. The corporations are gone !!
@gangstamind187 Ron Puals solution is no solution at all, throw your hands up it the air the economy it's to complex lets wait for the market. Growth it's always just around the conner just a little bit more time..... If markets were fully efficient they wouldn't produce slumps. I would rather put up with a bit of waste from the government than the waste of the private sector with 10% unemployed for the next ten years.
@honjo294 Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
I am too judgemental. I saw this kid and the title of this video and thought he was going to spend 9 minutes glorifying Keynesianism that was taught to him by some professor. Thank god there are young people like him who can still orchestrate a thought. I thought I was the last person in their twenties who believed Keynesian theory is asinine at its core and is more of a political movement than actual economic principles of savings and investment. GREAT VID!
keynes economics has no chance of working - it may have worked if they could control the media and the internet wasn't invented - The government has to lie, cheat, intervene, takeover and steal in order to make keynes economic work - Keynes would have a lot better chance of working if we didn't have a federal reserve because of the volatility of such large money supplies and inflation
keynes economics has no chance of working - it may have worked if they could control the media and the internet wasn't invented - The government has to lie cheat and steal in order to make keynes economic work
I don't think it's sound to say that people will take their stimulus checks and buy things. I'd say it's just as likely, when the economy is bad, that they'll save it, for fear of the economy getting worse. Thus that money has temporarily left the economy.
@Thesterness yeah, if everyone they hides their money it under the mattress but nearly no one does they'd put in the bank, then banks can lend it out, (hopefully for productive uses). I agree stimulus checks don't help the economy but I don't think that's why I'd argue its because wealth has to be transferred from the economy into the newly printed money, in a bid to stimulate that same economy. Even if some one buys something, chances are its from Asia anyway. which only helps their economy.
As a non-Keynesian, I've got to say that people like you are really not helping the cause of free market economics. This was so sloppy, riddled with so much inaccuracy and bias that's it's not worth addressing. Go back to macro 102 and don't come back until you can explain in detail real Keynesian positions and why they're wrong.
that's like a company whose profits exist solely because of the acquisitions or mergers it has transacted. if it's not organic, then it's not really growth.
@SaintMichael1000 There was an audience, I was there. But the crowd was small. There was promotion throughout the community for the seminar but it seems few citizens are interested in Keynesianism. That's a hard sell.
1st keynes was a product of his time. Under production, high unemployment hell yeah stimulate the economy. You are dismissing Keynes on the notion of full employment when Keynes dealt with low employment and u seem to get off on it too which is pretty sad really. Government spending doesn't lead to speed boat buying, more like better education, infrastructure etc. Grow up dear boy, what's the agenda?
@alandufour So our massive debt and deficit is an example of your sound philosophy? No, government would never misappropriate funds. There's no evidence of government waste or citizens abusing the system. Why are you so afraid of freedom and letting people keep their money to do what they want? Do we really need a "benevolent" government to "stimulate" us? When you say "hell yeah stimulate" you're putting me and my children on the financial ropes for your of values. That sounds tyrannical to me.
@callforfreedom Our massive debt and deficit is an example of GREEDY BANKERS IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM WHO ARE NOT REGULATED TO SOME DEGREE!!! Governments shouldn't have bailed them out I agree with that! In real capitalism if you snooze you loose. There WILL ALWAYS be some government waste and citizens abusing the system, that's life. Not afraid of freedom, afraid of fat greedy bankers. Yes we need a "benevolent" government to "stimulate" us DURING A RECESSION, otherwise the economy stagnates
@callforfreedom How am I putting you and your children on the ropes when I'm talking about government spending IN A RECESSION that creates jobs, improves infrastructure, education, health the welfare state... Man you need to study some economic theory and stop listening to those conspiracy people...make your own mind up! peace
califorfreedom is right. GW said "We've abandoned the free market principles to save the free market". How stupid can you get? Long live the free market!!!
you know the federal treasurer of australia came to my school last year to do a little speech cause his son goes there. you know what he said when he got in to get a photo with a bunch of kids? "SAY KEYNES!" stupid fool is educated at oxford on economics. it's going to be hilarious when gerald celente's predicitons come true, things all go to hell and keynesians get shot up in the street for ruining the world. HARVARD PRINCETON YALE - BULLETS BOMBS BANKS
@999JPETZ No it was gread. And Friedman didn't speak for gread. Some seem to forget that the worst catastrophe (Don't tell me I have to tell witch) has happend in countries with more govt intervention, as gread has nothing to do with capitalsim nor free market, it's a behaviour of humans. Human is gready, no mather if we are talking communism, facism, socialism, capitalism.
@whatnameisavailablee He didn't state the transfer payment as the route by which GDP increases directly. He stated that after the transfer payment, the recipients of the payment will spend it. When the recipients spend the transfer money the GDP will increase. The transfer payment indirectly increases GDP by stimulating consumer spending.
Keyensian economics leads to artifical booms which are misleading indicators of a recovering economy, when in fact It creates an artifical boom cycle or bubble that burst creating even worse more prolonged more frequent collapses. simply subsidizing or stimulating any form of buissness wheter its public or private leads to inflation and malinvestment. It is not sustainable wealth nor does it create it.
Economics is soft science. It doesnt follow a strict scientific method because you cannot conduct isolated experiments and interpret the result, like they do in chemestry labs. Therefor, economic policy is basic trial and error. There have been recessions while following keynism and monetarism.
It's just like the dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism. Truth of the matter is that they are just words. It's all bullshit semantics. What is the difference between a government and a corporation? Society should be worrying about how to accumulate power rather than to concern itself with where the power lies. China is a communist country. USA is somewhere near capitalist. How big an economic disparity does it exist between them? Any critical thinker would be able to call the economist's bluff.
I think part of the problem with econmics, is that you can only isolate a two of three factors at a time and analyse in a model, because of this no model developed on a computer can accurately predict the trends in the economy. They are a good guideline, but thats all they are. Capatilsm can't function properly in the sense it undergoes period crisis by design, thus elements of Keynesian theory are relevant.
@Apocholypse Economic models are tested with simulations ran on computers. You can run the numbers thousands of different ways and change many variables while seeing what happens over time. Keynesian Economics begins to fail when the money stops representing a value of wealth and starts representing debt. Our currency has represented debt since the day we went off the gold standard.
@DevoutSkeptic Bush imposed Keynesian economics AND HANDED OFF TO OBAMA to rip off the people.. If you check history.. keyseain economics was some what successful during the depression and after ww 11 ..We live in a different time.. No growth opportunity .. The corporations are gone !!
@SteinbergRothschild - Almost all physical theories are logical and mathematically consistent and well defined. They are also almost all wrong. Rare is it that a physical theory turns out to represent the way even the simplest of physical systems operates. Complex systems, like interacting human beings in various environments with different cultures and values and so on are mostly vastly beyond even the most sophisticated sciences to date.
@steinbergRothschild (continued) Complex systems theorists are beginning to understand some of the principles involved with certain complex systems, and people like Yaneer Bar-Yam have certainly applied these ideas. The type of assumptions made by proponents of free markets and the logical and mathematical ideas associated with their models are simple minded, only applying to highly idealized systems.
Its been a year since i left my last comment. And if you had read it carefully you would have seen that i was completely neutral in terms of my economic policy preferences. I don't advocate monetarism nor Keynesian economics. I have read milton friedmans books and i have a bachelors degree in economics (specificly Keynesian economics), and yet i cant decide which is better because no one knows..
what a fool. keynsian economics is a way of making economic growth more stable. if it wasn't for keynes it would go major boom-major depression-major boom-major depression. now, instead it goes boom-recession-boom-recession. during the great depression, the government increased taxes and cut spending- look where that got them. that's the first example of modern economics gone wrong. i'm on the right in terms of economics, but for the love of god, without keynes, you americans would be in chaos!
@samm1809 So true, post WWII after hyperinflation of many countries Keynesian economics helped resatbilise the market. Friedman's monetary theory was tested by Reagan via forced structural adjustment of reluctant South American countries. It was very corrupt.
@samm1809 How does keynesian economics stabilize economic growth? The application of Keynesian economic philosophy was the direct cause of this recession. The market cycles would be less dramatic in a more variable economic system. The Federal Reserve doesn't help your cause either. Only a economic system that grows its middle class consumer base would be the only variable system. If our middle class turns poor, you'll have no economic growth. Gov't economists must focus "middle class".
@MillzTheAthlete true sorry i've become really interested in economics over the last few years and spent a hell of a lot of time thinking about it and learning about it. don't worry i'm with you now. i'm a libertarian free market capitalist and theres no going back now that it's all there in front of me. END THE FED!
@TheKSE1 I don't blame you. This presentation doesn't do Keynesian Economics justice. Instead of giving tax cuts, government is supposed to invest in public institutions. This should ONLY be done during a contraction. During an upturn, it's supposed to do exactly the opposite, cut spending. Generally It evens out the market fluctuations, creating a more balanced economy. I wish i could give you a link to a better explanation of keynesianism, but i can't.
ok so the value of the dollar goes down after a gov't stimulus so that would be inflation right? so then the central bank raises interest rates to lower inflation to correct for this, no?
well isnt that because of the recession and that theyre trying to encourage borrowing and investment. but i believe the Fed is starting to raise interest rates.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
this guy obviously does not know anything about economics. When this talk was 1st given it was under the Bush years where the American economy a pure model of the lazze fare approach. Look where that has gotten us.
Are you kidding me homesdads? We haven't had a truly free market for generations. G.W. Bush has nothing to do with this. In fact, he was famous for saying he was abandoning free market principles to save the free market. What a contradiction! For the last century, the economic policies of both Democrat and Republican politicians have by-and-large been only a difference of degree NOT principle. These government distortions of the market are overwhelmingly Keynesian in nature and therefore bad.
@callforfreedom Aside from the obvious absurdity of listening to television in terms of the acquisition of information it is puzzling as to how any individual can believe that the Bush administration was 'free market.' This is particularly strange when the growth of government expanded considerably under is rule.
@Mechanized0 Did you not read my quote above? I said, "he [Bush] was famous for saying he was abandoning free market principles to save the free market." I would never say Bush was friendly to the free market. HE WAS NOT. Republicans and Democrats have undermined our economic system for at least a century with Keynesian and Progressive (Socialist) policies.
@callforfreedom It was not suggested that you were promoting the Bush administration but rather I was agreeing with your sentiments. My statements were placed for added emphasis. My apologies if this was not clear in my previous post.
Having observed the Bush administration's policies significantly expand the scope of government it is a wonder that anyone could believe that government contracted during that period. Worse, some individuals even naively, and incredibly one might add, claim the Bush administration was "laissez-faire." Such a conclusion could not possibly be reached upon even a cursory examination of his administrations policies.
This is a reductionist presentation of the slightest sliver of Keynesian economics. To say that government policy is substantially based on Keynesian theories is flat out wrong. The reason the US got into its current mess is by ignoring Keynes' advice around managing capital markets.
These three categories were prodigals,imprudent risk takers,and projectors ( These categories are the same as Keynes's financial banker -speculators from chapter 12 of the GT).Smith was very clear of the consequences that would follow if loans WERE made to any of these kinds of borrower: the loans will be " wasted and destroyed ".This is exactly what has happened in the United States and the rest of the world.
This guys is full of shit, i bet he's some clueless car salesman who thought he knew a lot about little. He should talk to Paul Krugman who would meticulously explain to him how Keynesian theories have saved western society more then once.
rascalz819 3 days ago
what a prick
Cockerilla 1 week ago
@2020starman how is keynesian economics against Glass Steagall? In fact many economists of the keynesian persuasion like Joseph Stiglitz and Pual Vocker are aganist the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. Please stick to arguing the topic and stop trying to discredit the person posing the proposition.
honjo294 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@honjo294 Nothing... It just assisted the loser monetary system ...fuck Maynard Keyes and the fed reserve
2020starman 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@honjo294 Maynard was the founder of the IMF For god sakes get a life
2020starman 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Keynesian economics is a perfect scam set up by IMF founder Maynard Keynes
Its monetary policy you can manipulate the markets, hide money, and steal from.Keyseain economics and BEN Bernake must be stopped .its always been a complete failure.Its a Washingtons honey pot
2020starman 2 weeks ago
Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOOL ?YOU ALL ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS
2020starman 2 weeks ago
cutting taxes is not a stimulus it's simply policy...also Keynesian policy is primarily based on monetary policy, not the aforementioned fiscal policy. You really don't seem very intelligent regarding economic theory, at least your trying to teach simple Keynes instead of something like Austrian.
mikeswanon8989 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
mikeswanon8989 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
mikeswanon8989 3 weeks ago
John Maynard Keynes wasnt for printing money he wanted that goverment used its real money from taxes
meProudToBeCaucasian 1 month ago 4
The simulation is not false as the recession has come about due to a decrease in consumption from economic agents pessimistic out look, there fore the increase is cash would not only boost there confidence in the short term to mitigate the effects of the recession but also return the consumers confidence quicker to the long run equilibrium that is that path it was on before the recession or shock accrued.
honjo294 1 month ago
Completely narrow, biased, one-sided, uninformed and unduly critical presentation of Keynesian economics.
Jason93609 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jason93609 Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOOL
2020starman 2 weeks ago
You can't predict how humans are going to spend their money. Keynesian economics=epic fail
sportstuber11 1 month ago
@sportstuber11 Not like its worst then Friedmans alternative.
dave19941000 1 month ago
Did someone show this to obama?
JDPKRevolution 1 month ago
@Krugmanistheking on this assumption. If you want, I can draw out the AD, AS curves, and show you the shifts so that it is easier to understand. I have narrowed you down to one line and that is that people are not rational. No shit sherlock, thats why a central planning system doesn't work. That's why your over simplified ideas of injecting money through central, on the assumption of how much money you believe is required.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking To say that my examples are not relevant is complete ignorance. Look at every single good and service ever produced, over time production becomes more efficient and the cost per unit goes down. Cars, books, TVs, furniture, radios, calculators, trains, food. Thus the real price has been lowered. Of course this is applicable to the macro scale, this is the reality of the world! Now your argument comes down to rationality, how ironic. Everything in keynsian economics is based
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking That is news to me my friend. I was not aware in the US they didn't measure inflation with the CPI. My example is completely relevant, you should really do some econs 101. Over an economy is able to produce goods and services more effectively, and thus lowering the real price. Every single good and service in the world has decreased in price over time, there is a shift out to the productions possibility curve. This is the definition of economic growth.
Rasterius 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Rasterius haha the shrinking GDP IS A JOKE !!
2020starman 1 month ago
@Krugmanistheking lastly, yes Keynes was right when he advocated the borrowing of money to purchase capital. He was however completely against inflation and borrowing for consumption as you probably already know, from his work 'The Economic Consequences of the Peace'. In his last publication after his death he also noted the risks in central banking and was first and foremost a believer in free markets, as he was a huge follower of Adam Smith.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking The only way you can borrow out of debt, is to borrow more money to purchase capital so you can increase your ability to pay back debt, ie your productive capacity. The US does not do this, it borrows more money, and then spends it on consumption goods, which are made in Chindia. You will come to see that an economy grows through savings and under consumption, while you're at it look at Austrian school predictions of 08 vs the keynsians and the same for every other bubble.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking Economic growth, the increase in real income so that an economy can increase its ability to satisfy its wants is not caused by an increase in spending, but an increase in productive capacity, as you may remember from the productions possibility curve. But an increase in the money supply by central banks is a false means of economic growth, as it does not reflect the quantity of money demanded by people to invest. People save and underconsume to get rid of debt, not borrow more.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking productive capacity of the US economy remains relatively constant, and the new money created is malinvested, such as we saw from the NASDAQ bubble and the housing bubble. Without central banks, banks would have to rely on savings and under consumption to give out loans, so that capital can be purchased and wise investments, or unwise investments can be made. The difference is that banks have to actually have people saving and under consuming so that they can lend out money,
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking Of course this is not where the majority of demand pull inflation comes from. Look at the figures for the historic money supply yourself, available at the feds website. The increase in the inflation, demand pull inflation, is caused by the increase in the money supply by monetary policy. Of course GDP is higher, because people have spent more money and more jobs have been created, but one thing still remains. As the pool of money grows exponentially, to service debt, the
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking When a bank lends someone money, to purchase capital so that they can get a better paid job, they expect the money back. When the person pays back the money there is an increase in the supply of money, and there is an increase in the supply of capital. Thus an economy has caused demand pull inflation through the increase in the supply of money. He is now able to earn a higher income and buy more things.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking This can come about through fractional reserve banking, monetary or fiscal policy. In a world without central banks, private banks can only lend money that people have saved there, to invest and buy capital goods, thus increasing the productive capacity of a nation. Governments could only borrow to a limit, as money would the increase in the money supply from fractional reserve banking from productivity is relatively slow.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking effect on the CPI has been negligible. Sometimes we have cost push inflation because of natural disasters, but in general, economies have a decrease in costs to goods and services because of productivity so this is not the primary source of inflation. Now this leads to demand pull, where given that AS is constant an increase in the demand for goods and services at a macro scale means that they are more expensive.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking Economic growth by definition is the increase in the economy to satisfy its wants, by an increase in real income. When the cost of goods and services goes down due to productivity we have both an increase in economic growth and deflation. We also have increase in employment. Now where does inflation come from? There is cost push and demand pull inflation. It is quite true to say we have experienced some cost push inflation as of late due to the rise in commodities but the effec
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking Look at almost every single good and service that has every existed; cars, TVs, aeroplanes, computers, furniture, etc. Over time the production costs decrease as a result in productivity, improvement in technology etc. So the price of the goods over time becomes lower, we have a deflationary effect, and the result is increase in profits to firms, as more people can afford the good at the lower price, and they hire more workers.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@Krugmanistheking is most often associated with todays system, works which laid the foundations for Friedman and the like. My examples are not false analogies, they are representative on a macro scale, as most econs 101 students would know, through the circular flow of income mode. Over time, when the productive capacity of an economy increases, the real cost to consumers of goods and services, made by firms is lower. By definition we have a deflationary effect.
Rasterius 2 months ago
@KrugmanisthekingThe arrogance to criticise? That astounds me, criticism is the highest level of intellectual pursuit, and judging by your username it is the threat to your ideology that concerns you more than the pursuit of truth.Now on to the matter of economics. You can play semantics all day, and I myself am a thorough academic of Keynes and you are right to say it was not his ideologies that we see today in practice. However the mainstream neo-liberal monetarist based economics we see today
Rasterius 2 months ago
Keynsianism and monetarism got us into this mess. The idea that you cant have deflation, economic growth, and low unemployment simultaneously is absurd. Take, cars, planes, TVs they have all decreased in real costs as a result of increase in productivity, thus real income has increased, demand increases, firms hire more labour, so we have economic growth, deflation and higher employment!! You can only borrow your way out of debt, if the debt is to increase ability to pay back debt!!
Rasterius 2 months ago
ANswer to video ...most people dont fucking know
2020starman 2 months ago
What a retard. Keynes very clearly states, in The Economic Consequences of the Peace, that inflation poses one of the most dangerous threats to the social order. To imply that Keynesianism is pro-inflation is retarded. It's all about counter-cyclical government spending, inflating when the economy is weak and deflating when it is strong.
harrymjackson 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This guy is an idiot
cryptosquid 3 months ago
I reckon i can sum this up very quickly. Ok when the level of unemployment rises which often corresponds with economic slow down, the government pumps money into the economy by way of running a fiscal debt, this stimulates the economy and creats growth, however when economic growth is at a good level the government will run a fiscal surplus which wards of inflation because it removes the excess of money in the economy that would de value the dollar. If i missed any thing please comment
ryanthomasmccallum 4 months ago
So if we sent 2000 dollars to every American we would all be spending more money. Okay well lets just do that and see what happens. One word INFLATION. It will not make it better at all and most of all it will create what we are in today. You can't just stimulate the economy, there is no "it" at all, the economy is organic. But Keynesian economics does not even condone what supposed Keynesian theories we follow today!
AnthonyCommonE 4 months ago
If Joe motor boat wasn't so greedy and had some foresight he wouldn't have over purchased and made a profit, greed got in the way.
glazierEd 5 months ago
@glazierEd if those customers were so materialistic then Joe motor boat wouldn't need to produce more.
Ltpeppers05 1 month ago
@Ltpeppers05 exactly the bqackwards thinking thats dooming our country. blame the victim.
glazierEd 1 month ago
Comment removed
glazierEd 5 months ago
Comment removed
2020starman 5 months ago
I seriously doubt this guy has read much of Keynes if any of his main work, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. I bet this guy doesn't know what is the cause of fluctuations in employment or the same, what determines the volume of employment at any given time? If he can't give a simple concise answer he's never read Keynes.
mujaku 5 months ago
mikma was here
mikma 5 months ago
question. when the boat seller buys the new boats, doesn't that create jobs? and also create more money to inject into the economy?
banky41 5 months ago
@banky41 its all dependent on thing like taxes ect, and wot value he recieves on the resale, because in any transaction there is always a level of dead weight loss,
ryanthomasmccallum 4 months ago
Comment removed
2020starman 6 months ago
right because when we run deficits we only print money to pay for new projects.... ummm... as if government bonds do not exist
MrMvt333 7 months ago
Take a look at these controversial videos ...>>" Obama deception" and "Loose change" Via You Tube.... then do some of you're own research to cross check the videos .. millions of people are off main news ...
2020starman 7 months ago
You are so wrong about Keynes. Nobody has disporven Keynes General Theory of Employment. The only thing liberterians do is change the assumptions. That is not a proof.
jeatroff 7 months ago
I've seen some seriously idiotic comments on this thread! Read some Hayek and if you're smart enough you'll understand the dangers of central planning and the benefits of free market competition. I doubt most of you could understand Hayek though....
Jidster01 8 months ago
Comment removed
2020starman 7 months ago
Isn't he forgetting that the fed also prints new money to pay off our debt, essentially stealing money out of our pockets and devaluing the dollar?
Jidster01 8 months ago
Jesus fucking christ these guys are ass licking morons. Yes, Keynesian economics is invalid however so is Free market economics.
Errors portrayed in this video:
- Assuming that the only source of money the government has is borrowings and tax receipts.
- Ignoring the real problem, that unemployment and part-time employment are destroying production.
- Ignoring the fact that during a depression, stimulus and government employment is needed to maintain what little production still exists.
PonguigPeopinn 9 months ago
@PonguigPeopinn You sound like a commie.
Myke1T 8 months ago
@Myke1T
Well, YOU are a commie.
Stupid fuck.
PonguigPeopinn 8 months ago
@PonguigPeopinn "Government employment is needed to maintain what little production still exists" And pay them with what? Money from the printing press? Or do they resort to robbing Peter to give Paul a job?
Myke1T 8 months ago
@PonguigPeopinn I apologise if I've misconstrued your post, but from what you've posted, it sounds like your answer is more government control.
Myke1T 8 months ago
@PonguigPeopinn unemployment exists because of minimum wage laws and a few other factors that prevent market wages from falling to their actual supply and demand level. It could also be in some cases, that if wages are at market levels, that people would rather wait out a recession or live on government or charity money than work at a job that is to terrible or pays to little. Either way, how is the government supposed to fix that?
Houshalter 8 months ago
the idiotically oversimplified understanding of economics displayed by strawmannings of Keynes are so rampant it's horrifying. Never once do these people stop to examine their assumptions, like the constantly implied assumption of perfect competition. Free markets do not compete perfectly. There are so many failures in the free market, I'll list until I run out of chars.
Monopolistic competition, externalities, natural monopoly, information asymmetry, limited rationality, sticky wages, barriers-
mortacrify 9 months ago
@mortacrify government isn't competetive at all. Maybe every 4 years 10 to 20 percent of the mostly uneducated population can select a new leader who can appoint a few bureaucrats to run the entire economy. And somehow that is supposed to be a more optimal solution than letting private firms compete in the real world on how well they fill their economic niche. Sure it has limitations (though I would argue they could all be overcome anyways), but if that applies to all other systems also.
Houshalter 8 months ago
Mark of a great educator: Teach them that an ideology is wrong and that you're right using a really badly put together analogy that doesn't explain anything about Keynesian Economics or why WWII saved the US from the Great Depression, or how Hitler rebuilt Germany by spending government money on creating a massive military. Genius.
Gothguy47 9 months ago
@Gothguy47 I lost you at the part where you invoked the broken window fallacy as an actual argument.
Houshalter 8 months ago
This guy builds up a straw man argument and then sets it on fire....
Violent2aShadow 9 months ago
END THE FED....RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT 2012
petiemac24 10 months ago
But without the stimulus, the speedboat business owner likely wouldn't have made enough sales to keep his business alive anyways. His business ultimately failed because of his decision making. Either way you look at it, the stimulus at least kept his business running a little while longer than it would've without it.
hh1608 11 months ago
Why is this tool pretending to be in front of a classroom as a teacher?
Ninetyone11 11 months ago
@Ninetyone11 if you listen you can hear people answering him in the background.
Fneguy 10 months ago
@Ninetyone11 Because he is..
jeremyjjeremiah 9 months ago
Benito Mussolini, stated:
“Fascism entirely agrees with Mr. Maynard Keynes, despite the latter’s prominent position as a Liberal. In fact, Mr. Keynes’ excellent little book, The End of Laissez-Faire (l926) might, so far as it goes, serve as a useful introduction to fascist economics. There is scarcely anything to object to in it and there is much to applaud.”
jiveturkeyusa 1 year ago
@jiveturkeyusa Yea and Prescott Bush, Dupont Tire, and JP Morgan wanted to have a fascist coup to take over the government from FDR.
HoGraz 11 months ago
@HoGraz Goldman Sachs through Congress and the Secretary of Treasury and Halliburton through the VIce President. Pure corruption and or fascism!
jiveturkeyusa 11 months ago
@jiveturkeyusa Yea.
HoGraz 11 months ago
It doesn't matter what model anyone follows anywhere, from a monarchy, to a Republic to a Dictatorship,, or a Religious nuthouse, the fact is that 5% of the people, hold 95% of the wealth. The rest are left to fight for the crumbs.
excavtrooper 1 year ago
@excavtrooper
Kenysian economics reinforces the fascistic elements in our gov, the reason all that wealth is at the top is because we have centralized banks and people controlling other peoples wealth. In a free market at least, people can earn at the sweat of their brow and keep their savings and not have them stolen by wall street bankseters.
RyanR3volution 1 year ago
@RyanR3volution Yes but the people in the city, the judiciary, the government and in my case (England), the supposed upper middle class and dare I say it without choking, the upper class; their lives are all geared from birth to attain a certain level of wealth and power over and above the so called working class. I am neither socialist nor communist, but I see the utter inequality in status between our education, expectation and life achievement between us.........and them.
excavtrooper 1 year ago
@excavtrooper
Then why support a system which gives the gov (curropt) a easy way to give money to their pals. Free markets are what bring advances and are the most fair systems. Free markets reward people for their work and keep government under control. Giving gov power with anything is a dastardly mistake.
RyanR3volution 1 year ago
@RyanR3volution I agree but it's not that simple. I my working lifetime I have known wage freezes, pensioners have a fuel allowance but then they will decrease other benefits to pay for it. So as with most other systems they give with one hand, but take away with the other. Do you have the opportunity to have your savings in a tax free, offshore account?, or is it other local institutions paying you near zero interest for your savings.
excavtrooper 1 year ago
@excavtrooper
Well I do not support taxing anyones income because your income is your business and the gov does not own it. The Federal Reserve is responsible for the dangerous 0% interest rates which hurt the US economy on top of that they print more money, with no value.
I just think, no matter how well intentioned gov interference in the economy does nothing but creates booms and busts and distorts the natural order of things while hurting us all.
RyanR3volution 1 year ago
Why did Mother Teresa go to New Bedford Mass in 1995?
The whole pedophile thing is a cover story for the Vaticans fascism.
Thats why nothing ever happens to them.
The catholic church began cracking down on dissent in the
12th century under pope Innocent III.
Nothing has changed. The American Inquisition is the Spanish
Inquisition with the rule of law.
Watch Titicut Follies.
philipnute com
zsezse215 1 year ago
Do Austrian economist believe in nominal and real GDP?
SyCreations 1 year ago
There is, sadly, a wealth of this type of video on YouTube. Corporations and the wealthy hate Keynes because his policies lead to a far more egalitarian wealth structure - something those who would exploit inequalities for profit despise - even as they lead to a healthier economic model overall.
It is the Classical Economics model that has been debunked, not only by economists such as Krugman, Holland, Reich et al, but by history itself.
This is pro-corporatist propaganda, not a real class.
teebalicious 1 year ago
i don't think that your giving a full understanding here. You havn't distinguished between NOMINAL and REAL GDP. when money's printed, the price level goes up, so nominal GDP rises (like you said), but real GDP stays constant. And all economic models use real GDP, nominal values are distorted by inflation
wetkenny 1 year ago
This is the most amateur explanation of Keynesian economics I've heard. Keynes is rolling in his grave right now. Just for your info... Joe Producer is going bankrupt anyways, hence then need for the STIMULUS. And Obama's stimulus was not ALL created money, a third of it was in the form of tax cuts.
akphidelt 1 year ago
Is this a high school class? "Does anyone know what GDP is?".
ChaosDynamics 1 year ago
Clearly the presenter doesn't understand Keynesian economics, heck he doesn't even understand the difference between deficit vs non-deficit spending.
According to Keynes, government should run a surplus doing growth periods and deficits during recessions. (i.e. Canada has a huge deficit at the moment, but 10 years of surplus previously)
As a non-American I must say your Federal reserve is a joke, and a very bad one at that.
cappercastro 1 year ago 19
This has been flagged as spam show
@cappercastro Bush imposed Keynesian economics AND HANDED OFF TO OBAMA to rip off the people.. If you check history.. keyseain economics was some what successful during the depression and after ww 11 ..We live in a different time.. No growth opportunity .. The corporations are gone !!
2020starman 7 months ago
@cappercastro Wholeheartedly agree
1337wafflezz 4 months ago
@cappercastro That's why i'm voting for Ron Paul.
gangstamind187 3 months ago 8
@gangstamind187 good grief
scjsdnfgo8743hhgbf54 2 months ago
@gangstamind187 Ron Puals solution is no solution at all, throw your hands up it the air the economy it's to complex lets wait for the market. Growth it's always just around the conner just a little bit more time..... If markets were fully efficient they wouldn't produce slumps. I would rather put up with a bit of waste from the government than the waste of the private sector with 10% unemployed for the next ten years.
honjo294 1 month ago
@honjo294 Look bub.We have 800 trillion out in derivatives the banks are all zombie banks The GDP is shrinking Nafta and GATT prevent us from a grow economy.The repeal of Glass Steagall allows banksters to rip us off
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOOL ?
2020starman 2 weeks ago
@cappercastro Keynes also believed that Nazi Germany was the best model for the application of his economic theory. Way to go buddy!
darkstar913 3 months ago
@darkstar913 Prove it. Keynes detested Nazi Germany as he was a liberal.
cappercastro 3 months ago
I am too judgemental. I saw this kid and the title of this video and thought he was going to spend 9 minutes glorifying Keynesianism that was taught to him by some professor. Thank god there are young people like him who can still orchestrate a thought. I thought I was the last person in their twenties who believed Keynesian theory is asinine at its core and is more of a political movement than actual economic principles of savings and investment. GREAT VID!
tonyg0123 1 year ago
@tonyg0123 I thought the same thing....
dusfermc 1 year ago
our debt is going to be 90% of GDP soon thanks to Obama
Pvic 1 year ago
keynes economics has no chance of working - it may have worked if they could control the media and the internet wasn't invented - The government has to lie, cheat, intervene, takeover and steal in order to make keynes economic work - Keynes would have a lot better chance of working if we didn't have a federal reserve because of the volatility of such large money supplies and inflation
luckycharmz336 1 year ago
keynes economics has no chance of working - it may have worked if they could control the media and the internet wasn't invented - The government has to lie cheat and steal in order to make keynes economic work
luckycharmz336 1 year ago
I don't think it's sound to say that people will take their stimulus checks and buy things. I'd say it's just as likely, when the economy is bad, that they'll save it, for fear of the economy getting worse. Thus that money has temporarily left the economy.
Thesterness 1 year ago
@Thesterness yeah, if everyone they hides their money it under the mattress but nearly no one does they'd put in the bank, then banks can lend it out, (hopefully for productive uses). I agree stimulus checks don't help the economy but I don't think that's why I'd argue its because wealth has to be transferred from the economy into the newly printed money, in a bid to stimulate that same economy. Even if some one buys something, chances are its from Asia anyway. which only helps their economy.
an0m0nus 1 year ago
Or more accurately, they come from a loan from the chinese!
DanNinjaMan 1 year ago
I think what this guy mostly leaves out is that those "Stimulus checks" were taken from taxes on other peoples incomes. Oops!
DanNinjaMan 1 year ago
As a non-Keynesian, I've got to say that people like you are really not helping the cause of free market economics. This was so sloppy, riddled with so much inaccuracy and bias that's it's not worth addressing. Go back to macro 102 and don't come back until you can explain in detail real Keynesian positions and why they're wrong.
IUEC38 1 year ago
that's like a company whose profits exist solely because of the acquisitions or mergers it has transacted. if it's not organic, then it's not really growth.
TrishtheDishNY 1 year ago
keynesian economics is bullshit!
halflifeproductionz 1 year ago
I really wish life was as simple as these analogies people use.
RuthlessMurder 1 year ago
I get the strange feeling that there is no audience.
SaintMichael1000 1 year ago
@SaintMichael1000 There was an audience, I was there. But the crowd was small. There was promotion throughout the community for the seminar but it seems few citizens are interested in Keynesianism. That's a hard sell.
callforfreedom 1 year ago
1st keynes was a product of his time. Under production, high unemployment hell yeah stimulate the economy. You are dismissing Keynes on the notion of full employment when Keynes dealt with low employment and u seem to get off on it too which is pretty sad really. Government spending doesn't lead to speed boat buying, more like better education, infrastructure etc. Grow up dear boy, what's the agenda?
alandufour 1 year ago
@alandufour So our massive debt and deficit is an example of your sound philosophy? No, government would never misappropriate funds. There's no evidence of government waste or citizens abusing the system. Why are you so afraid of freedom and letting people keep their money to do what they want? Do we really need a "benevolent" government to "stimulate" us? When you say "hell yeah stimulate" you're putting me and my children on the financial ropes for your of values. That sounds tyrannical to me.
callforfreedom 1 year ago 5
@callforfreedom Our massive debt and deficit is an example of GREEDY BANKERS IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM WHO ARE NOT REGULATED TO SOME DEGREE!!! Governments shouldn't have bailed them out I agree with that! In real capitalism if you snooze you loose. There WILL ALWAYS be some government waste and citizens abusing the system, that's life. Not afraid of freedom, afraid of fat greedy bankers. Yes we need a "benevolent" government to "stimulate" us DURING A RECESSION, otherwise the economy stagnates
alandufour 1 year ago
@alandufour the government was partly to blame for the problem happening in the first place when it enacted the Community Reinvestment Act.
TrishtheDishNY 1 year ago
@callforfreedom How am I putting you and your children on the ropes when I'm talking about government spending IN A RECESSION that creates jobs, improves infrastructure, education, health the welfare state... Man you need to study some economic theory and stop listening to those conspiracy people...make your own mind up! peace
alandufour 1 year ago
and Obamas economic stimulus will not work because of: (see above)
Lmmarcher09 1 year ago
califorfreedom is right. GW said "We've abandoned the free market principles to save the free market". How stupid can you get? Long live the free market!!!
goober1973 1 year ago
@goober1973 There is no limit to stupidity. Love the name btw. It takes a "goober" to speak the truth. ;)
callforfreedom 1 year ago
This guy is a joke of an economist. Does he even know the difference between deficit spending and non-deficit spending?
polvotierno 1 year ago
you know the federal treasurer of australia came to my school last year to do a little speech cause his son goes there. you know what he said when he got in to get a photo with a bunch of kids? "SAY KEYNES!" stupid fool is educated at oxford on economics. it's going to be hilarious when gerald celente's predicitons come true, things all go to hell and keynesians get shot up in the street for ruining the world. HARVARD PRINCETON YALE - BULLETS BOMBS BANKS
samm1809 1 year ago
Comment removed
sandrofrei1 1 year ago
@sandrofrei1 The video's so "worthless" that you watched it and posted a long comment about it including economic philosophy? lol
callforfreedom 1 year ago
Keynesian economics did not lead to the BP disaster, Friedman's ideas did.
999JPETZ 1 year ago
@999JPETZ How so?
anyfekinnamewilldo 1 year ago
@999JPETZ No it was gread. And Friedman didn't speak for gread. Some seem to forget that the worst catastrophe (Don't tell me I have to tell witch) has happend in countries with more govt intervention, as gread has nothing to do with capitalsim nor free market, it's a behaviour of humans. Human is gready, no mather if we are talking communism, facism, socialism, capitalism.
Warzoooooo 1 year ago
Ludwig von Mises baby!!!
jneil2007 1 year ago
2:10 Incorrect, GDP will not go up when the government hands out money, transfer payments are not included in the GDP calculation.
whatnameisavailablee 1 year ago
@whatnameisavailablee He didn't state the transfer payment as the route by which GDP increases directly. He stated that after the transfer payment, the recipients of the payment will spend it. When the recipients spend the transfer money the GDP will increase. The transfer payment indirectly increases GDP by stimulating consumer spending.
JakeTheShake 1 year ago
Keyensian economics leads to artifical booms which are misleading indicators of a recovering economy, when in fact It creates an artifical boom cycle or bubble that burst creating even worse more prolonged more frequent collapses. simply subsidizing or stimulating any form of buissness wheter its public or private leads to inflation and malinvestment. It is not sustainable wealth nor does it create it.
Bolthrower91 1 year ago
this wasnt a great explanation of k econ
dannners 1 year ago
Economics is soft science. It doesnt follow a strict scientific method because you cannot conduct isolated experiments and interpret the result, like they do in chemestry labs. Therefor, economic policy is basic trial and error. There have been recessions while following keynism and monetarism.
DrewsAreGood 1 year ago 16
It's just like the dichotomy of capitalism vs socialism. Truth of the matter is that they are just words. It's all bullshit semantics. What is the difference between a government and a corporation? Society should be worrying about how to accumulate power rather than to concern itself with where the power lies. China is a communist country. USA is somewhere near capitalist. How big an economic disparity does it exist between them? Any critical thinker would be able to call the economist's bluff.
cherylwens 1 year ago
@DrewsAreGood thats what makes it interesting.
hopkin104 1 year ago
@DrewsAreGood not really. if you run a state/country by moral values, then it should pretty much be fair to everyone.
TrishtheDishNY 1 year ago
@DrewsAreGood
I think part of the problem with econmics, is that you can only isolate a two of three factors at a time and analyse in a model, because of this no model developed on a computer can accurately predict the trends in the economy. They are a good guideline, but thats all they are. Capatilsm can't function properly in the sense it undergoes period crisis by design, thus elements of Keynesian theory are relevant.
Apocholypse 1 year ago
@Apocholypse Economic models are tested with simulations ran on computers. You can run the numbers thousands of different ways and change many variables while seeing what happens over time. Keynesian Economics begins to fail when the money stops representing a value of wealth and starts representing debt. Our currency has represented debt since the day we went off the gold standard.
NoogLeader 1 year ago
@DrewsAreGood It's all an equation. We simply have yet to discover it.
DevoutSkeptic 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DevoutSkeptic Bush imposed Keynesian economics AND HANDED OFF TO OBAMA to rip off the people.. If you check history.. keyseain economics was some what successful during the depression and after ww 11 ..We live in a different time.. No growth opportunity .. The corporations are gone !!
2020starman 7 months ago
Comment removed
2020starman 7 months ago
@DrewsAreGood That's why austrian economics is based on LOGIC!!!
SteinbergRothschild 5 months ago
@SteinbergRothschild - Almost all physical theories are logical and mathematically consistent and well defined. They are also almost all wrong. Rare is it that a physical theory turns out to represent the way even the simplest of physical systems operates. Complex systems, like interacting human beings in various environments with different cultures and values and so on are mostly vastly beyond even the most sophisticated sciences to date.
telltree 5 months ago
@steinbergRothschild (continued) Complex systems theorists are beginning to understand some of the principles involved with certain complex systems, and people like Yaneer Bar-Yam have certainly applied these ideas. The type of assumptions made by proponents of free markets and the logical and mathematical ideas associated with their models are simple minded, only applying to highly idealized systems.
telltree 5 months ago
@SteinbergRothschild
Its been a year since i left my last comment. And if you had read it carefully you would have seen that i was completely neutral in terms of my economic policy preferences. I don't advocate monetarism nor Keynesian economics. I have read milton friedmans books and i have a bachelors degree in economics (specificly Keynesian economics), and yet i cant decide which is better because no one knows..
DrewsAreGood 5 months ago
what a fool. keynsian economics is a way of making economic growth more stable. if it wasn't for keynes it would go major boom-major depression-major boom-major depression. now, instead it goes boom-recession-boom-recession. during the great depression, the government increased taxes and cut spending- look where that got them. that's the first example of modern economics gone wrong. i'm on the right in terms of economics, but for the love of god, without keynes, you americans would be in chaos!
samm1809 1 year ago
@samm1809 So true, post WWII after hyperinflation of many countries Keynesian economics helped resatbilise the market. Friedman's monetary theory was tested by Reagan via forced structural adjustment of reluctant South American countries. It was very corrupt.
dannyvets25 1 year ago
@samm1809 How does keynesian economics stabilize economic growth? The application of Keynesian economic philosophy was the direct cause of this recession. The market cycles would be less dramatic in a more variable economic system. The Federal Reserve doesn't help your cause either. Only a economic system that grows its middle class consumer base would be the only variable system. If our middle class turns poor, you'll have no economic growth. Gov't economists must focus "middle class".
MillzTheAthlete 1 year ago 2
@MillzTheAthlete true sorry i've become really interested in economics over the last few years and spent a hell of a lot of time thinking about it and learning about it. don't worry i'm with you now. i'm a libertarian free market capitalist and theres no going back now that it's all there in front of me. END THE FED!
samm1809 1 year ago
@samm1809 The business cycle is actually caused by artificial interest rate manipulation of the federal reserve/national banks using fiat money.
BrandonVT 1 year ago
I hate objectively titled videos that have an open bias. The title should be "why keynesian economics are wrong".
majinspy 1 year ago
As someone who is new to and interested in the political implications of economics, this Keynesian economic theory seems like idiocy.
TheKSE1 1 year ago 2
@TheKSE1 I don't blame you. This presentation doesn't do Keynesian Economics justice. Instead of giving tax cuts, government is supposed to invest in public institutions. This should ONLY be done during a contraction. During an upturn, it's supposed to do exactly the opposite, cut spending. Generally It evens out the market fluctuations, creating a more balanced economy. I wish i could give you a link to a better explanation of keynesianism, but i can't.
Vincent171090 1 year ago
yea, the low interest rates only encouraged the crazy risk taking the last decade
ilovecrap 1 year ago
Ain't money lended from FED not printed?
Misyu44 1 year ago 2
Yeah, isn't it just a big check like the publisher's clearing house checks on TV? ;) They take that giant check down to the treasury.
callforfreedom 1 year ago
great
clever50 1 year ago
anyone here who watches aqua teen hunger force knows which character would be a keynesian.
"gentlemen, BEHOLD! a printing press! now i can create wealth!!!"
SushiHead20 1 year ago
ok so the value of the dollar goes down after a gov't stimulus so that would be inflation right? so then the central bank raises interest rates to lower inflation to correct for this, no?
ilovecrap 2 years ago
@ilovecrap
Look where interest rates are now.. between 1.25% and 0%.
Hardly "raised" at all.
ijust1 1 year ago
well isnt that because of the recession and that theyre trying to encourage borrowing and investment. but i believe the Fed is starting to raise interest rates.
ilovecrap 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this guy obviously does not know anything about economics. When this talk was 1st given it was under the Bush years where the American economy a pure model of the lazze fare approach. Look where that has gotten us.
homesdads 2 years ago
Are you kidding me homesdads? We haven't had a truly free market for generations. G.W. Bush has nothing to do with this. In fact, he was famous for saying he was abandoning free market principles to save the free market. What a contradiction! For the last century, the economic policies of both Democrat and Republican politicians have by-and-large been only a difference of degree NOT principle. These government distortions of the market are overwhelmingly Keynesian in nature and therefore bad.
callforfreedom 2 years ago 23
Second that 1000%
TheLegalImmigrant05 2 years ago
@callforfreedom Aside from the obvious absurdity of listening to television in terms of the acquisition of information it is puzzling as to how any individual can believe that the Bush administration was 'free market.' This is particularly strange when the growth of government expanded considerably under is rule.
Mechanized0 1 year ago
@Mechanized0 Did you not read my quote above? I said, "he [Bush] was famous for saying he was abandoning free market principles to save the free market." I would never say Bush was friendly to the free market. HE WAS NOT. Republicans and Democrats have undermined our economic system for at least a century with Keynesian and Progressive (Socialist) policies.
callforfreedom 1 year ago
@callforfreedom It was not suggested that you were promoting the Bush administration but rather I was agreeing with your sentiments. My statements were placed for added emphasis. My apologies if this was not clear in my previous post.
Mechanized0 1 year ago
@Mechanized0 ✔ My mistake. LOL
callforfreedom 1 year ago
@callforfreedom No problem.
Having observed the Bush administration's policies significantly expand the scope of government it is a wonder that anyone could believe that government contracted during that period. Worse, some individuals even naively, and incredibly one might add, claim the Bush administration was "laissez-faire." Such a conclusion could not possibly be reached upon even a cursory examination of his administrations policies.
Mechanized0 1 year ago
@homesdads uhhhhhhhm
sonnybrown 2 years ago
@homesdads
What is your definition of Laissez Faire?
gunsandbullhorns 1 year ago
This is a reductionist presentation of the slightest sliver of Keynesian economics. To say that government policy is substantially based on Keynesian theories is flat out wrong. The reason the US got into its current mess is by ignoring Keynes' advice around managing capital markets.
microglyphics 2 years ago
These three categories were prodigals,imprudent risk takers,and projectors ( These categories are the same as Keynes's financial banker -speculators from chapter 12 of the GT).Smith was very clear of the consequences that would follow if loans WERE made to any of these kinds of borrower: the loans will be " wasted and destroyed ".This is exactly what has happened in the United States and the rest of the world.
kitycalifornia 2 years ago