I like how this economist thinks inflation is a metaphysical fact. He doesn't even realize the damage it does and that it's not needed and actually hurts the economy (or he does, but is being intellectually dishonest).
I also like how, at the beginning, he talked about low interest rates and gave that as a justification for his policies. It must be nice to force the interest rates with a giant banking cartel rather than letting the free market set them properly to justify your interferences.
Another way to look at it is that even if government spending of gdp as a percentage of total economic gdp shrinks as the guy was assuming then even if that were the case then each percentage of gdp would be worth more than it is today. The only thing that I can think of that give credit to his argument is that the visible effects of government spending on the economy would be less and I could be wrong about that but still that would be more of a political argument than an economic one
You do great work exposing slippery bastards like this. These phonies want to convince common people that economics cannot be easily understood. It is a great ploy to coax people to trust you instead of their own common sense. However, you prove that if the arrow is straight and the point is slick, it can pierce through the crap, no matter how thick.
I'd like to know how these Keynesians that always insist on measuring Government spending as a share of GDP *know* what GDP will be in even the *near* future. I'll bet the short answer is they don't. They'll paint rosy pictures of future GDP numbers so as to soften and relative-ize the impact of their *insane* levels of government spending. Even *if* the GDP numbers turn out right, how is 18% of GDP an acceptable level of spending?!? Almost 20 cents of every dollar? Even 10% is too much, IMHO.
@MerlinYoda And why does spending need to grow with the GDP? The government has a prescribed role. Their services get more expensive as we get a stronger economy? The correlation between the costs of their services and the size of the economy is linear? Sounds incredibly inefficient.
The answer is, "because they can take more from a stronger economy". It has nothing to do with the needs of the country, and everything to do with the wants of the bureaucracy.
This Bernstein clown actually believes what he is saying, arguing that "pre-Keynesian" economics is wrong. Hey Bernstein, your Keynesian policies are the problem!
I bet this joker thinks that wealth comes out of a printing press.
Nice interview. 2010 3.7 Spending 14.7 GDP 3.7/14.7 = 25.17% US GDP at best grows at 3%. By 2020: 14.7*(1.03)^10 = 19.75 (GDP) 5.7 (Spending) 5.7/19.75 = 28.86% So, spending is going up 3.69% of GDP. You should have called his BS!
I'm not sure if I'm phrasing this right but here's a question I would have liked to hear him answer (just adjust the numbers a bit): "If we borrow 1 trillion dollars and GDP increases 10% and that's considered positive, is there any downside if we borrow 100 trillion dollars if GDP increases 10%?
@evmazu The funny thing is, Keynesians like Krugman think we need to borrow far more than 1 trillion dollars. Naturally that spending would outpace GDP growth and would even hinder it.
Bernstein is deliberately ignoring how government crowds out private borrowing. He is also assuming economic growth and decreases in unemployment when really the economy has been stagnant and unemployment has remained the same rate for quite a while now even in light of all the people who give up looking for work (which are not counted in the labor force). What ever happened to that Keynesian multiplier, Bernstein? Oh, the CBO also assumed that, that's why unemployment is higher than projected.
Wow! The interviewee is a slippery little snake! He keeps talking about %GDP, but how can he know what the GDP will be? These guys are killing the economy! There wont be positive GDP with these guys running the show.
Very few people are able to nail a custard pie to a barn door but I just watched Jan Helfeld do so. Watching him take apart Bernstein was as rewarding as seeing Toto pull the curtain on the Wizard of Oz.
LOL "it's not money taken from the taxpayer TODAY it's taken from taxes to be collected in the future"
So, it's payed for by taxing the people today and future generations compounded by interest.
It makes no sense to increase spending when you are running a deficit. You run further into the red so you need more growth in the future to support the additional spending + interest. Your are more likely to reduce future growth because of higher taxes and reduced purchasing power through inflation
Anybody who wants to burden children, who have no say and cannot vote yet, with significant debts from a plan that is unavoidably subject to normal risks such as war or natural disaster, is just evil.
@8chxBLhJDy9 Oh, but did you notice how with one side of his face he says "not enough", but with the other side of his face says "I'm not trying to tell people what the right amount is"?
Love Keynesian logic; oh wait, they dismiss logic. That's the 'genius' of Keynes according to Paul Samuelson himself. Hilarious.
SvenBenson 23 hours ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@SvenBenson great insight!
janhelfeld 18 hours ago
Good work on this one Jan. In my estimation Mr. Bernstein isn't an economist, just another government propagandist.
thej762000 4 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Jan, this guy is a slimebucket. I don't know how you keep your composure, but bravo.
Aryaba 2 months ago
Great stategy at the start asking for more stimulis. He wasn't expecting to argue it from the other side. Very clever.
aussiedon8 2 months ago
I like how this economist thinks inflation is a metaphysical fact. He doesn't even realize the damage it does and that it's not needed and actually hurts the economy (or he does, but is being intellectually dishonest).
I also like how, at the beginning, he talked about low interest rates and gave that as a justification for his policies. It must be nice to force the interest rates with a giant banking cartel rather than letting the free market set them properly to justify your interferences.
egervari 2 months ago
Another way to look at it is that even if government spending of gdp as a percentage of total economic gdp shrinks as the guy was assuming then even if that were the case then each percentage of gdp would be worth more than it is today. The only thing that I can think of that give credit to his argument is that the visible effects of government spending on the economy would be less and I could be wrong about that but still that would be more of a political argument than an economic one
Darkwizzrobe 3 months ago
when jan puts it simply, he's accused of "inflating the dynamics."
lol.
ridiculous.
Diatonic135 3 months ago
Deer in the headlights.
LiberRaider 3 months ago
You do great work exposing slippery bastards like this. These phonies want to convince common people that economics cannot be easily understood. It is a great ploy to coax people to trust you instead of their own common sense. However, you prove that if the arrow is straight and the point is slick, it can pierce through the crap, no matter how thick.
LibertyPen 3 months ago 6
@LibertyPen Your defense of freedom is quite articulate. Thanks!
janhelfeld 3 months ago
I'd like to know how these Keynesians that always insist on measuring Government spending as a share of GDP *know* what GDP will be in even the *near* future. I'll bet the short answer is they don't. They'll paint rosy pictures of future GDP numbers so as to soften and relative-ize the impact of their *insane* levels of government spending. Even *if* the GDP numbers turn out right, how is 18% of GDP an acceptable level of spending?!? Almost 20 cents of every dollar? Even 10% is too much, IMHO.
MerlinYoda 3 months ago 3
@MerlinYoda good point!
janhelfeld 3 months ago
@MerlinYoda And why does spending need to grow with the GDP? The government has a prescribed role. Their services get more expensive as we get a stronger economy? The correlation between the costs of their services and the size of the economy is linear? Sounds incredibly inefficient.
The answer is, "because they can take more from a stronger economy". It has nothing to do with the needs of the country, and everything to do with the wants of the bureaucracy.
RiNSpy 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
This Bernstein clown actually believes what he is saying, arguing that "pre-Keynesian" economics is wrong. Hey Bernstein, your Keynesian policies are the problem!
I bet this joker thinks that wealth comes out of a printing press.
mersk100 3 months ago
Another Obama clown exposed spinning the truth ,,agenda?..This guy probably believes his own BS..
JaxxBat 3 months ago
I can't wait until people like this have no employment
absolutely brainless that man
baseball7390 3 months ago
oldSchnik 3 months ago 2
@oldSchnik your numbers are better than CBO'S. He left before I could bring it up.
janhelfeld 3 months ago
I love Jan's interviews. They ALWAYS end up with the interviewee walking out after finding themselves backed into a corner LOL!
PongGod 3 months ago
I'm not sure if I'm phrasing this right but here's a question I would have liked to hear him answer (just adjust the numbers a bit): "If we borrow 1 trillion dollars and GDP increases 10% and that's considered positive, is there any downside if we borrow 100 trillion dollars if GDP increases 10%?
evmazu 3 months ago
@evmazu The funny thing is, Keynesians like Krugman think we need to borrow far more than 1 trillion dollars. Naturally that spending would outpace GDP growth and would even hinder it.
cbl2988 3 months ago
@cbl2988 GDP includes private and government spending. The more spending, the bigger GDP.
rumco 3 months ago
Great interview, but they do not look like they are in the same room.
rdhayes06 3 months ago
Bernstein is deliberately ignoring how government crowds out private borrowing. He is also assuming economic growth and decreases in unemployment when really the economy has been stagnant and unemployment has remained the same rate for quite a while now even in light of all the people who give up looking for work (which are not counted in the labor force). What ever happened to that Keynesian multiplier, Bernstein? Oh, the CBO also assumed that, that's why unemployment is higher than projected.
cbl2988 3 months ago
Wow! The interviewee is a slippery little snake! He keeps talking about %GDP, but how can he know what the GDP will be? These guys are killing the economy! There wont be positive GDP with these guys running the show.
12345678tube 3 months ago
Very few people are able to nail a custard pie to a barn door but I just watched Jan Helfeld do so. Watching him take apart Bernstein was as rewarding as seeing Toto pull the curtain on the Wizard of Oz.
LibertyPen 3 months ago 2
No no Jan. Not only taxing and borrowing but also counterfeiting through debt monetization via its own central bank.
rumco 3 months ago
@rumco That is technically borrowing.
cbl2988 3 months ago
Don't get too popular Jan. Anyone who has seen you in action will be too scared to talk to you. Good job.
mikrobspen 3 months ago
LOL "it's not money taken from the taxpayer TODAY it's taken from taxes to be collected in the future"
So, it's payed for by taxing the people today and future generations compounded by interest.
It makes no sense to increase spending when you are running a deficit. You run further into the red so you need more growth in the future to support the additional spending + interest. Your are more likely to reduce future growth because of higher taxes and reduced purchasing power through inflation
deadman12078 3 months ago
@deadman12078 Exactly!
cbl2988 3 months ago
That is what they call unsustainable debt.
cbl2988 3 months ago
Anybody who wants to burden children, who have no say and cannot vote yet, with significant debts from a plan that is unavoidably subject to normal risks such as war or natural disaster, is just evil.
BrettJeffries 3 months ago
@8chxBLhJDy9 Oh, but did you notice how with one side of his face he says "not enough", but with the other side of his face says "I'm not trying to tell people what the right amount is"?
CurtHowland 3 months ago
My grandfather called people like that, "Educated Damned Fools".
CurtHowland 3 months ago
Socratic method used to demonstrate hypocrisy.
CurtHowland 3 months ago
Lol... Jan should just look at the camera man and go "Why do so many of my interviews end that way?"
I guess thats what happens when you honestly question these people. They make themselves look foolish and then get embarrassed and leave.
BigDaddyDJD 3 months ago
Golly! Miss Bernstein is a good dancer, but only if your doing the CNBC Shuffle.
note22 3 months ago
Jared Bernstein is a perfect example of why the Federal government is shape that it is. This is our best and brightest?
Mooja12 4 months ago
Disgrasful. Obviusly trying to mislead at every turn. Great interview Jan.
dickiepipes 4 months ago 8
@dickiepipes Thank you, I did my best to expose the nonsense.
janhelfeld 3 months ago 6
another john maynard keynes cult follower.
dickiepipes 4 months ago
ROFL
JartaMan 4 months ago
So Jared....What causes inflation?
spanieaj 4 months ago 5
Politics is an intellectually corrupting zero-sum game.
maganz 4 months ago 2
He mentioned Keynes....hehehehe
spanieaj 4 months ago 11
This is true in FANTASY LAND!!!
spanieaj 4 months ago 2