The GDP is more a measure of waste and consumption than of wealth, if you really want to improve the GDP go around breaking windows the GDP will increase for every window that gets replaced.
This is a great example of 19th Century Economist and Philosopher Frédéric Bastiat who wrote a magnificent essay titled "The Broken Window Fallacy". I strongly suggest you to look it up and enjoy one of the greatest readings ever written.
Keynesian policies are important during very particular times of economic downturns, and most specifically during an American decline. There are times when it is beneficial to have public financing to stimulate economic growth. The problem is when Keynesian economics continues on for too long.
@sotthapana It's not even up to debate my friend. Even Milton Friedman would have insisted that there are times when there must be capital infusion by government.
@darrenmuse Milton Friedman held this position, so there is no debate? Just because he was a libertarian doesn't mean that we all have to agree with him on everything. On many points, members of the Austrian School disagree with him. Search for Murray Rothbard's talk on Friedman if you are interested.
@RadiantMirage There's no debate that there are some times when capital inflow of cash from government is beneficial. Yes, to that there's no debate. There are very few individuals who'd argue, except for Rothbard. There's also a reason why Rothbard is a relative unknown: because his theories were so ridiculous and far-fetched that even Cato had a problem with him! Then again, I guess Cato is Keynesian too, right?
@darrenmuse I don't know why you think that dropping names of libertarian groups that disagree with the Austrian school matters at all. Just about every member of the Mises institute would say there is still debate on this, not just Rothbard. You can assert they are ridiculous unknown crackpots if you like, but just because ideas are popular does not mean they are right.
Broken Window Fallacy. If all those Engineers weren't busy building and repairing more and more robots to clean broken glasses, they could have used their time and money to work on robots that dislodge cherries from people's throats.
@FiveofHearts1 The point of the broken window parable is to show that one cannot ignore hidden costs (the glass we've lost), so unless someone is breaking glasses on purpose (despite that he did that here), it's like saying you're better off with no glass and I guess drinking out of your hand? If it breaks, you would want to get it fixed, unless the cost of the fix is somehow uneconomical (favorite $2,000 glass toilet seat broke, so I guess i'll put the old one back on and go without).
@FiveofHearts1 And the owner of the window has to pay for that new window instead of buying a multipass, and all he gets out of it is something he already had.
@winteris57 I'm very familiar with the story of Joseph and I think you're really onto something! Perhaps we SHOULD look for someone with the foresight, similar to Joseph, who could avert us from disaster! Oh wait, what's that? *leans over to hear the counsel of a Classical Liberal* Oh, um I've been told we've already found him, and his name is Ron Paul.
broken window fallacy is what this is. if what he said was true people who burn houses would be loved caz it gives jobs to construction workers. 1892 was a great time for america.
@2406samson Yeah! No child labor laws. Shopping at the company store. And environmental regulations that could set a river (or several) on fire. Lets go back to the good old days when your 10 year old could operate heavy machinery!
@wintereis57 What they don't tell you is that child labor in the US was slowly going away if not almost completely done with by the time the laws came into effect.. now kids can't even hold a job during the school year to help their family out if they wanted to. Completely forgot about that one huh? PS.. Kids on the farms operate heavy machinery.
@D34thSetX Who is they? I had one during HS. I see teens working all the time today. So this "kids can't work' idea is hogwash. They don't operate manglers in sweat shops like they did. There aren't disasters like that of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory anymore. What "they" don't tell you is that all these regulations now fit under "Keynesian Economics". Instead of trying to raise the rest of the world's standards, many want to lower ours to compete with third world countries.
That is a good point. Ideally we should cooperate. I beleive there is a healthy balance between competition and cooperation. leaning more towards cooperation of course. But what we have seen these days is spiteful, and shameful. The opposite to competition is cooperation. But we haven't seen either lately. The gov has been picking winners, wether they win or lose. we don't even have true competition.its all rigged.
@wintereis57 They is children, officially under 18. Actually, you cannot hold down a 30-40hr a week job to help support your family during high school years as the law mandates that while school is in session (at least in my home state of California) that the maximum hours per week that can be worked is 20, 30 if school is not in session. So, you don't know what you are talking about. Sweat shops, who cares most children in 3rd world countries either work or are used as child prostitutes.
@wintereis57 "What "they" don't tell you is that all these regulations now fit under "Keynesian Economics"." You're right, they don't tell you.. it's because regulations make it easier for the government to control the economy. Which is one of the things that Keynes talked about extensively when it came to government spending and control in the economy.
@wintereis57 "Instead of trying to raise the rest of the world's standards, many want to lower ours to compete with third world countries." It's none of our business to impose what we think onto others, the standards that we have today actually came about through Capitalistic tendencies. When politicians saw that child labor was declining they outlawed it to take credit for what the market was already doing. We cannot impose our standards on countries that aren't near our tech. level.
this is based on a very basic misunderstanding of keynes. He was a conservative and only proposed "keynesian" solutions during times of extreme crisis like the depression (or now). Additionally, his point was not that creative destruction is helpful, but that infusing money into the economy during times of monetary drought can be helpful in and of itself. He did say it should be productive if at all possible, which this trite shit ignores completely. Look up Joe Stiglitz for abetter explanation.
This is more analogous to the broken window fallacy. One could make the case that the military industrial complex is guilty of this. Keynesian adherents though, they stand somewhere between free market and planned economy. I would say they carry a god complex in thinking that they can control something as vast as a modern economy even with the research that goes in to it. Ever tried even just counting the number of products in a Walmart? Next, try New York.
When the disaster in Japan hit, some people actually thought it would be good for their economy, since it would create all sorts of jobs lol. Why not just carpet bomb New York, think of all the jobs it will create.
The stupity of the worlds "intellectuals" never cease to amaze me.
@groam6666 It wasn't the intellectuals saying that, anyone who did fails to understand the broken window fallacy. Although destruction appears to create jobs on the outset, the fact remains that people would have spent their money on other things had they not suffered a loss. In the end either situation will create more jobs but the destructive scenario still leaves the world sans whatever was destroyed.
I'll take it one step further, essentially making people dig holes and then filling them back up will create jobs. Will it create any real growth in the long run? no. In this way money is like oil in an engine.
@DavidFromHB the publication of the book doesn't mean Keynes didn't hold his theory or make prescriptions earlier. Are you suggesting he developed the theory as he wrote the book? It's debatable about whether keynesian economics pulled us out of the depression or we got out of it in spite of Keynesian economics. I would suggest that the belief that Keynesian economics pulled us out of the depression is "what allowed his theory to come into" general practice.'
Sadly, the socialists making the movie were probably meaning the above clip to be an attack on the GOOD economic argument that you should allow businesses to fail, instead of bailing them out.
Of course it doesn't make any sense in that light, but then again bailing out failed businesses doesn't make any sense, either, so they had to shift the argument a bit in order to make it work.
@FenrirLupus There is a distinction between seeing a crash coming and knowing what damage it will do. Also are you suggesting, then that Keynes was a good economist until he was made a bad economist by not seeing the crash coming? It makes him a bad economist in the same way it makes you a bad thinker when you fail to see the difference between advocacy and observation.
@worldofdraculas I would think theories should be judged by how well they work rather than by their predictive power. But what exactly is your point? Is it that because Keynes "didn't see the stock market crash coming in 1929 his theory is faulty?"
"There is a distinction between seeing a crash coming and knowing what damage it will do."
Even if only his quantitative prediction was wrong, then I still think it's permissible to criticize him for that. Remember, his theory holds that qualitative prediction is possible with scientific accuracy, and his own epistemological framework is based around empiricism and falsifiability. And if you look at what he was actually saying about the present state of the economy shortly -
- before the start of the Great Depression, then I think there's a good case to be made that even his qualitative predictions were false. Add to that the realization that his policy prescriptions were a causal factor in bringing about the Depression, and I think we may fairly denounce him as a second coming of John Law. -
No, the validity of Keynes' theory did not change in that instant. His failure to predict the Great Depression is merely an indication of a much greater, ongoing failure of his.
Consider the implications of early satellite reflection experiments for Newton's mechanics. The experiment did not cause Newton's theory to become incorrect, but merely revealed its incorrectness to our scientific understanding.
@PanzerDivisionBOM I don't think you can answer the question posed to someone else. I doubt you know what Lupy was trying to argue. Unless you are him pre. I never proposed he was thinking that it changed "in that instant". A "greater, ongoing failure', huh? Lions and Tigers and Bears ! Oh my! "the implications of early satellite reflection experiments"? Suppose I consider the implications of you not saying anything specific for you actually understanding Keynes, or Great Depression
@PanzerDivisionBOM "a good case to be made that even his qualitative predictions were false. " and those were? (with citations please) and what were the "policy prescriptions (again citations?) Please explain how they were causal. So far you've managed to say a whole lot of nothing. Perhaps I should say your propositions as an expression of your epistemic framework, minimize the quantitative dimension of analysis
@PanzerDivisionBOM "if only his quantitative prediction was wrong" Which was? The point was that losing money didn't prove Keynes didn't see it coming. I don't recall saying one couldn't criticize Keynes or his followers. There is plenty to criticize. But does that mean they should be criticized for things they never advocated like "proposing things like alien invasions[or] war" . As to the "scientific accurracy and epistemic framework, can you source those claims please?
Sometimes destruction of entire industries happens because of the ego's of various peoples in many multifacted organizations who all think they know what is best. Destruction & capital flight happens because of a simple loss of confidence in exsisting institutions & established traditions (that thru time ) become outdated and dull. It's inievitable... As mice we need to look for new cheese... that's about it.
@FenrirLupus and that is relevant to the discussion how? Is that really all you have left? Assuming what you say is true, does that magically make Keynes a bad economist? If so does that mean his grasp of economics is then frozen for the rest of his life at that point? Does it mean he could never have any good ideas? Or does bringing it up mean you really did get your education in the same place your farts come from. Do you mistake them for fresh air and inhale deeply?
@FenrirLupus And yet, Foofy this was not a proposal. In fact, Krugman says it was a thought experiment.Of course, Krugman wasn't actually "proposing things like alien invasions'. He was talking about what scale of spending he considers necessary to end the recession. He mentions an alien invasion because it's a way of drawing attention;getting people talking about his underlying argument. I don't see any mention-much less a proposal- of war in this quote, but then you're the "educated one"
@FenrirLupus Indeed, poopypants. you can't even trust yourself to support your own argument by presenting the "evidence" for it. Probably because you either made it up or believed someone else who did. One thing for certain, you didn't read it. Not to mention you're so dense you fail to grasp that just because a follower of Keynes proposes something, doesn't mean it's Keynesian.
Breaking a window and gashing a hand is twice as effective I say, why not take it all the way. Shoot yourselves because there are medics, cops, firefighters, funeral homes, and so many more like Joe who runs the crematorium, that need you!
voting for Ron Paul no more bush tactics end the patriot act stop the feds time for sound money and bring the troops home from a primitive war that is making the wall street rich off the blood of our troops bring the states back for the people by the people
Hey let's subsidize failure and keep obsolete systems "in business" at the expense of the taxpayer! Who cares if the agrarian society is no longer needed, let's keep em around and let em put Corn Syrup in everything! Diabetes for all!
@ReaganGoldwaterBuckl Agriculture is needed, only without the subsidies many American farmers would not be able to compete with agriculture-intensive nations. This can also be done using tariffs on agricultural imports. Subsidies, tariffs, capital controls, etc all have similar effects, they protect infant or adult industries from superior foreign industries. All developed nations used these methods to get to where they are today. It is not awarding failure.
@redarrowhead2 And how would you know that? There are many crops not subsidized. How do they compete?
A domestic farmer has huge advantages over importers. Getting taxes and regulations off their backs would help more.
What subsidies do is encourage farmers to grow certain crops that are water intensive. Other crops would have been grown instead without subsidies. That's why there are water shortages in California. They grow certain crops they otherwise not be growing.
@redarrowhead2 Why should I have to suffer from a tariff for the benefit of a special interest? It's mercantalism. A small group of people benefit at the expense of hundreds of millions. Everyone is poorer in the long-run because those people who benefit from that one tariff lose out with hundreds of other tariffs that they don't benefit from.
The only way a specific tariff recipient could benefit is if no other tariffs were allowed. That never happens.
@ReaganGoldwaterBuckl Uh, duh, um . . . did yeah ever think that maintaining a significant agricultural sector might actually be a part of a good national security plan. Especially if you have a nation of over 300 million people. Nope. You didn't because you are too stupid to realize that food comes in handy in a crisis. I'm willing to bet you are a Christian. You might want to brush up on the story of Joseph. Yeah, having food stores was a good idea then too.
i dont like keynesianism because jobs for the sake of jobs are simply the worst thing ever. i dont give a shit whether they help the economy because the people can spend stuff. when you work (join the military or whatever) that is a part of your life. so if it's meaningless work then that isn't enjoyable or anything.
Hmm, put this way, it sounds like something Ayn Rand would have hated. This scene reminds me of a part in Atlas Shrugged where a large steel industry owner is made obsolete by 'progress', or the discovery of a new steel. He is protected by a government that thinks he should be spared this atrocity, because it would harm this man and his business.
That'd be like if we had to pay a steam engine investor for failing to see that it would become obsolete, and taxing his "offenders" to make it fair.
@MontajBlaze great example of meaningles economy. if the business isnt doing good then it shouldnt do good - it's as simple as that. the more ilearn about complex issues the more surreal this world becomes. and the big presidents and prime ministers dont seem as clever and awe inspiring as they did when i was younger.
Right. But what happened before the Great Depression was an inflation of the money supply. Gene Smiley has shown that prices declined & then rose (production increased incredibly in the 1920s, but the Fed had attempted to keep prices stable) in the twenties, which kept the CPI stable, helping to lead to the Roaring Twenties. Once the bubble burst, all the inflation disappeared- leading to deflation. Hayek's conversation with Keynes regarding inflation took place six weeks before Keynes' death.
This is not Keynes, from what I understand. Keynes did not advocate this type of behavior. He advocated the iduction of money into the private sector. not the reallocation of money in the private sector. Am I wrong?
I've heard Keynes' arguments, but have not yet read all his works. From what I have heard, though, it was his followers who really bastardized his message. For instance, after WWII had ended a follower named Alvin Hansen said that the government should continue to spend money on tanks and weapons lest our economy collapse. Keynes' followers were also the ones clamoring for large inflation, whereas Hayek notes that Keynes had told him that he would never advocate such a thing.
Creative destruction, It´s actually more Schumpeter. Try looking him up on wikipedia. By breaking the class someone eventually will invent the plastic cup.... Clever a.....
Free markets are characterized by booms, bubbles, and busts. Keynes argues that we can do something useful to help, and that in some cases coordination and regulation are preferable to having recurrent depressions. He never advocated destroying anything that I am aware of. Classical liberals are the ones who destroy, destroy the financial system, confidence, jobs and lives.
Hmm, I think you have misunderstood Keynesian economics. Though it has been a long time since I have dealt with this, I feel I´m on safe ground stating that your video had just about nothing to do with what Keynes
theories. I get that you are an anarchist and thus dislike governments, but who cares, because anarchist economics will suffer the same problems Keyne wanted to fix, being that many people will cheat and are not to be trusted. And my guess is you have no working solution.
@JRBendixen It appears you said a lot, without saying anything. Can you elaborate on keynesian economics and perhaps point out the problems of the free market that he tried to fix? Then we could at least compare those problems to those caused by keynesian economics.
@daobagua Ok, bare with we and excuse me for the name calling ect. that is to come. Your comment shows that you either know nothing about Keynesian economics are a moron or had very bad teachers. Do not feel to bad about it though, I´m no genius either. That said, It´s not really so that Kaynes ideas are to be explained in a comment section or by insane videos.
Rather my point was that SecularNumanist economical and political views has no solution for the real world problems he tried to fix.
@daobagua Quote I´m no specialist on the subject, though I can make statements as..
A) Kensian economics are based on state regulated trade, which is why it works in the current state of affairs and also the way almost all successful countries to a degree work.
B) Anarchist economics are generally based on unregulated person to person barter trade, it just sux. so it´s on the dunghill of ideas.
@JRBendixen anarchic economies would almost certainly develop trade using precious metals without the state to impose paper currency on them. there's no reason to think people would result to barter, people throughout history have used gold and silver as currency... it's not that hard.
@daobagua Lastly, I will reread up on the subject and answer your specific problems/questions. Meaning that you can make me reread up on a subject you probably never read anything about and share it without any name calling(I promise), if you can answer this question:
Which single word for an entity makes Keynesian- and anarchist economics incompatible. It´s incredible easy.
@JRBendixen I am assuming that the single word is likely "Government". Keynesian economics says that the government should save in the good times and spend when the business cycle hits a down turn. This spending will artificially increase demands and promote jobs. The jobs will employ people, who make wages, and then create actual demand hopefully pulling out of the recession earlier. Anarchist economics... Is this simular to laise fair capitalism? Cheers.
@daobagua I was looking for the word "state", but government is quite close enough. So you can go ahead ans ask away, though it may be some time before I answer, because I have to read up on the bloody stuff. And for the rest of your comment you are quite right right. The only thing lacking is the major mechanics he stated as premises.
But who cares, you did what I could not and made me look like a fool, so cheers.
@daobagua Though I have to ask why do you compare a pure barter system with capitalism, as these are and cannot be the same. The one can easily contain as an example futures while the other cannot. In other words would an anarchist system have a wallstreet?
I know that it´s I´m that has to answer, but I have already stated that it was I who was the fool, so I ask you to bare with me.
@JRBendixen Both Zerg and Keynes (as he is now interpreted) are more concerned with simply keeping people employed (doing anything) then actually producing things of value. (this is known as a broken window fallacy, see above comments) This is the difference between government control economics and free market based ecomomics.Furthermore, I never argued with you on whether his video is precisly defined keynesian economics, I said that you did not add any value to the conversation. Now please do
@daobagua paraphrazing:" Zerg ie. Keynes is more concerned with simply keeping people employed then actually producing things of value." Sure, but keynes never as far as I know would argue that destruction was a means to an ends or the end goal as zorg does. That is the way of the anarchists in general. And yes keynes never actually did work with the limitations of supply horizons, as is the reality of today. I like keynes though he has some faults regarding here and now.
@JRBendixen Keynes was very smart, but peoples interpretations of him have resulted in a government spending spree that far succeeds his expectation. Zerg says destruction creates jobs. This is a broken window fallacy (obviously). A little more subtle is government spending to create jobs. What you see is the government creating jobs with its spending, but what is not shown is that the government got that money through taxes, which decreased spending and thus jobs.
@daobagua And yea unemployment are still far more important than production value, for most countries of the world, because it simply makes money for the whole of the society and calms social unrest.
Also I´m working in the building industry in Denmark and we have to to look at limitations of supply horizons as we have almost no natural resources and I must say things are looking very grim. For example It is estimated that we cannot get hold of zink in any useful quantity in about 20 years.
@JRBendixen (5) I always wanted to go to demmark, hope to go in a few years. But probably back to japan this year. I work in the power gen industry, and I know what you mean about supply horizons. I think the only solution in the next 50 years is going to be nuclear. If we learn to store energy better, then renewables will be able to take more of the pie, but that might be a long way out. Any thoughts?
@daobagua Firstly Denmark rock and sux, it really depends. Ahh fek I could tell you a loads more of our culture than I have the time for now.
Quote:I´m not sure but I have heard it suffers the same supply issues and no european nation have politically solved the permanent vaste storage problem and I doubt the politicians ever will.
We work very hard to make the building-mass of Denmark more energy efficient. It´s going ahead but the task is vast.
@daobagua We have the largest amount of living-space per person in the world as far as I know. So the only true energy solution will be to get people to live in smaller homes and that is political suicide. Go figure. Our other actions like harsh demands on things like insulation has had it´s effect but is just about exhausted for value. We really have to demolish a huge number of buildings also very difficult. Besides we recycle 98% of all building materials.
@daobagua I would focus on communal infrastructure. But then again a huge amount of danes cycle to work , nonetheless I think it can have an effect. Further we should also focus on people working more at differentiated work places nearer their home if not from home(that is also widespread). Almost needless to say most danes work in a chair in front of a computer. So I´ll go for renewal of the building mass, infrastructure and extreme research and education efforts.
@daobagua One thing. Working on infrastructure tends to be an universal good thing , but as I just argued with some of my family today. If we are going to be 8-10 billion, well then the clay for bricks will run up as it has almost done in Denmark. And the problems extends as you know farther than that. I refuse to judge who should get hold of the clay and whom cannot, but I also know that the powerful will take it all. Solutions, well I truly have none, I´m too dumb and It´s just too big for me.
@daobagua Quote:" I said that you did not add any value to the conversation. Now please do" I usually try to think in terms of practical solutions in every case: I do not think that I have any that are adequate on the scale we are speaking. I´m just not that smart.
I have ideas for working solutions for specified local problems but none for the world. If I should have a go, I think firms should stopped being treated as personal individuals. But that solves just about the least of problems.
@JRBendixen I should also point out that I am not an advocate of an anarchist enonomic policy. Nor do I think Secularnumanist is (at least from this video, but I have not seen any others). I think his point is valid, it matters what they money is spent on, not just that it creates jobs. Warren buffett said it well, he could spend money building statues and then destroying them, that would raise the GDP, but nothing productive would come of it. We need to rethink the governments role in this.
@daobagua Quote:"I should also point out that I am not an advocate of an anarchist enonomic policy" I never thought so, but I hoped that you would make a stance.
Quote:"it matters what they money is spent on, not just that it creates jobs" I never got that his videos point was needless creation of jobs. Rather I thought it was meant to illustrate a weird cycle of destruction and jobs. Which is a ridiculous parody of keynes ideas and what goes on in reality.
@JRBendixen Yes that might be a ridiculous parody of keynes (that man was smart). But it is interesting to note how much government funding is spent on an oversized military industrial complex. This is essentially spending money to create tools, that destroy themself and other things, so that we can then spend more government money, giving company's grants to rebuild said destroyed nations. I am not saying all military is bad, but it seems to be a first reaction now a days.
@JRBendixen Since you asking me to take a stand on my economic policy I will (but I must remain tongue in cheek, for I do not know all the facts of everything). I think the government provides useful services in police, national protection and a judicial system for free people to settle disputes. In markets that have no government judicial system (black markets), typically minor disputes (he ripped me off) end up in serious violence. I think this is destructive to society, so I support gov here.
@JRBendixen (3) But the government spending money on programs to try and stimulate the economy is another thing. While jobs do matter, so does useful production. Without useful production, any stimulation simply prolongs the inevitable. Dot com burst to housing bubble and burst (what bubble is next).
If the government wanted to stablize the cycle, it could provide money to people (in form of tax cuts or a check). That way, at least, people who stimulate the economy for products they can use.
@JRBendixen (4) If government made no mistakes, then it would not be a problem to have them with there hands in the economy (even if they were not the most efficient). The problem I see is the the government sometimes makes logical and policy mistakes, this pushes the economy in the wrong direction and worsens recessions. Ex) During the great depression, the FED gold reserves increased, and yet the FED decreased the country money supply (did not print enough), this hurt the economy further.
@daobagua Do not get me wrong, I have at times argued that we have to rethinking our economics because of the former mentioned supply horizons. I mean what is the worth of a human society producing 5.000 types of chips. It´s I dilemma for me, I will not stop it though I think it is insane. The allocation of resources is just well insane.
I fear the threshold for a possible fair and viable global economy is far in past. Nonetheless I´m also positive.
@shadowgeyser My last statement was pretty specific from the question that was asked. The fact that DKshadow doesn't think that price controls are somehow significant to Austrian economics shows how dumb he is. Also, you didn't really correct me about praxeology since I didn't really disagree with what you were saying and you never really seemed to disagree with me.
@BlackFlame281 Where did I say price controls aren't significant to Austrian economics? Prices are vitally important to Austrian economics, like interest rates for example, which ties in with the Austrian Business Cycle Theory. I said Austrians will never say: a lack of price controls will lead to full employment. Because employment isn't the goal i.e. the ends of an economy, employment is just a means to an end. Try again without the straw-man.
@shadowgeyser Mises rejected the idea that empirical evidence could be applied to any social science because of the problem of induction. Where did Mises concede that empirical evidence could be used? I know of only one place but he implicitly stated this but never recognized it as such.
@shadowgeyser Has nobody here actually read Austrian economics? Praxeology is an epistemological entry point of Austrian economics. Say's Law explains how markets clear. Without this law, much of the explanation of how the market works comes into jeopardy. Also, most Austrians have given up praxeology (especially on YT) since much of their later work relies on empirical evidence.
@BlackFlame281 You used Somalia as it is today as counter-evidence against Austrian Theory. I am curious, In you mind how SHOULD Somalia be like today if Austrian Theory is correct?
@DKshad0w Well, the state has returned to Somalia so I'm not necessarily talking about today. However, the state does very little to interfere in the market. How should Somalia look? According to me, it looks just like it should. High unemployment, massive inflation, and markets that don't clear. But according to Austrian theory, flexible wages and prices should lead to full employment with all(most) resources being utilized.
@BlackFlame281 Austrians will never say no price controls will lead to full employment. Labor is just a resource like any other in the free market, prices coordinate resources to their most productive use. Employment doesn't really matter to the Austrians, you can have make-work projects like digging ditches and have full employment. What do you mean by all(most) resources being utilized? How do you measure that?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Zerg is a corporate ruler. He is NOT GOVERNMENT. He is expressing Friedmanism gone all the way. The belief in a "free market" ala Ron Paul is essentially a religious belief. It is faith. Faith is no way to run any system in the real world. Keep your faith in your church... and your free market fantasies there too. Keynes works and is the most fair to the most people until we find an even more Socially Democratic way to make sure that people who work hard keep what they earn.
@SecularNumanist "Corporations are a result of government grants."
Well, under the current economic system governments do in large part perpetuate corporate power. However, I'm not convinced that in a free market cartelization and other general abuses of power wouldn't occur. Sure, the companies can't use the government to crowd out competition, but who says there will be enough individual incentive, organization, and resources to fight the ologopic businesses.
@SecularNumanist (2) Other social or economic forces can still be in play to muck up the playing field. So how would a free market deal with cartels forming in the first place or at least getting rid of them once they emerged/exist already? I mean really, what's to stop Stodels from running the marketplace?
I realize your video had more to do with Keynesian demand for a valueless product, but that ain't my main beef here.
@Corporations8MyBaby Belief in the state is much more akin to belief in religion. The power of the state rests solely on belief in the state much like a church. You also have people erecting statues of dead presidents and carving their faces into the side of a mountain. The indoctrination of children in government schools at a young age. Government schools teach children to respect authority, not to question authority and accept all info they recieve from authority and not to question info.
@Corporations8MyBaby the most fair to the most people and for people to keep what they earn is to NOT TAX IT AWAY from them and just let them keep what t hey work for
@Corporations8MyBaby Friedman, though he had great ideas, also called for to much government intervention. Say, Hayek, Mises. Those are men who knew that the free market is the most fair to the most people, and launches the human race by leaps and bounds when it is allowed to work properly. What we have now is crony capitalism, that is all Keynes believed in. The government should choose which sectors get government funds and resources. Instead of market forces which are more accurate.
Commissioner Gordon has fallen far.
Atreus21 4 months ago
Doesn't this video better apply to the GDP?
The GDP is more a measure of waste and consumption than of wealth, if you really want to improve the GDP go around breaking windows the GDP will increase for every window that gets replaced.
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago
-You're a monster, Keynes.
-I know.
ShrugMeSilly245 4 months ago
This is a great example of 19th Century Economist and Philosopher Frédéric Bastiat who wrote a magnificent essay titled "The Broken Window Fallacy". I strongly suggest you to look it up and enjoy one of the greatest readings ever written.
guillermogg 4 months ago
@guillermogg That's exactly what I was referencing, hah, breaking windows is a great way to improve a nation's GDP.
FreeTheWorker 4 months ago
Broken Window Fallacy: /watch?v=erJEaFpS9ls
SkepticThink 4 months ago
isn't this why China has huge empty apartment buildings? it's better to employ the workers there than have them unemployed
Fawkes9001 4 months ago
"a cherry"
SedanChair 4 months ago
What movie is this from?
hanswolfgangmercer 4 months ago
@hanswolfgangmercer The Fifth Element. WATCH IT.
somercet1 4 months ago
Keynesian policies are important during very particular times of economic downturns, and most specifically during an American decline. There are times when it is beneficial to have public financing to stimulate economic growth. The problem is when Keynesian economics continues on for too long.
darrenmuse 4 months ago
@darrenmuse NO
sotthapana 4 months ago
@sotthapana It's not even up to debate my friend. Even Milton Friedman would have insisted that there are times when there must be capital infusion by government.
darrenmuse 4 months ago
@darrenmuse Milton Friedman held this position, so there is no debate? Just because he was a libertarian doesn't mean that we all have to agree with him on everything. On many points, members of the Austrian School disagree with him. Search for Murray Rothbard's talk on Friedman if you are interested.
RadiantMirage 4 months ago
@RadiantMirage There's no debate that there are some times when capital inflow of cash from government is beneficial. Yes, to that there's no debate. There are very few individuals who'd argue, except for Rothbard. There's also a reason why Rothbard is a relative unknown: because his theories were so ridiculous and far-fetched that even Cato had a problem with him! Then again, I guess Cato is Keynesian too, right?
darrenmuse 4 months ago
@darrenmuse I don't know why you think that dropping names of libertarian groups that disagree with the Austrian school matters at all. Just about every member of the Mises institute would say there is still debate on this, not just Rothbard. You can assert they are ridiculous unknown crackpots if you like, but just because ideas are popular does not mean they are right.
RadiantMirage 4 months ago
Comment removed
Knaeben 4 months ago
Broken Window Fallacy. If all those Engineers weren't busy building and repairing more and more robots to clean broken glasses, they could have used their time and money to work on robots that dislodge cherries from people's throats.
FiveofHearts1 4 months ago 34
@FiveofHearts1 The point of the broken window parable is to show that one cannot ignore hidden costs (the glass we've lost), so unless someone is breaking glasses on purpose (despite that he did that here), it's like saying you're better off with no glass and I guess drinking out of your hand? If it breaks, you would want to get it fixed, unless the cost of the fix is somehow uneconomical (favorite $2,000 glass toilet seat broke, so I guess i'll put the old one back on and go without).
Knaeben 4 months ago
@FiveofHearts1 And the owner of the window has to pay for that new window instead of buying a multipass, and all he gets out of it is something he already had.
worldofdraculas 4 months ago
What movie is this from? I can't put my finger on it.
Zimnyification 4 months ago
@Zimnyification
The Fifth Element
sdozer1990 4 months ago
@winteris57 I'm very familiar with the story of Joseph and I think you're really onto something! Perhaps we SHOULD look for someone with the foresight, similar to Joseph, who could avert us from disaster! Oh wait, what's that? *leans over to hear the counsel of a Classical Liberal* Oh, um I've been told we've already found him, and his name is Ron Paul.
ReaganGoldwaterBuckl 4 months ago
broken window fallacy is what this is. if what he said was true people who burn houses would be loved caz it gives jobs to construction workers. 1892 was a great time for america.
2406samson 4 months ago
@2406samson Yeah! No child labor laws. Shopping at the company store. And environmental regulations that could set a river (or several) on fire. Lets go back to the good old days when your 10 year old could operate heavy machinery!
wintereis57 4 months ago
@wintereis57 What they don't tell you is that child labor in the US was slowly going away if not almost completely done with by the time the laws came into effect.. now kids can't even hold a job during the school year to help their family out if they wanted to. Completely forgot about that one huh? PS.. Kids on the farms operate heavy machinery.
D34thSetX 4 months ago
@D34thSetX Who is they? I had one during HS. I see teens working all the time today. So this "kids can't work' idea is hogwash. They don't operate manglers in sweat shops like they did. There aren't disasters like that of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory anymore. What "they" don't tell you is that all these regulations now fit under "Keynesian Economics". Instead of trying to raise the rest of the world's standards, many want to lower ours to compete with third world countries.
wintereis57 4 months ago
@wintereis57
And why do we need to compete? Lets start working together to better the situation for everyone one this rock!
Dr01d1 4 months ago
@Dr01d1
That is a good point. Ideally we should cooperate. I beleive there is a healthy balance between competition and cooperation. leaning more towards cooperation of course. But what we have seen these days is spiteful, and shameful. The opposite to competition is cooperation. But we haven't seen either lately. The gov has been picking winners, wether they win or lose. we don't even have true competition.its all rigged.
TheSleepingbandit 4 months ago
@TheSleepingbandit Okay lets compete, May the best coöperator win! :-)
And remember, don't give away your freedom by voting for someone.
Dr01d1 4 months ago
@Dr01d1 I don't have a problem with that idea at all.
wintereis57 4 months ago
@wintereis57 They is children, officially under 18. Actually, you cannot hold down a 30-40hr a week job to help support your family during high school years as the law mandates that while school is in session (at least in my home state of California) that the maximum hours per week that can be worked is 20, 30 if school is not in session. So, you don't know what you are talking about. Sweat shops, who cares most children in 3rd world countries either work or are used as child prostitutes.
D34thSetX 4 months ago
@wintereis57 "What "they" don't tell you is that all these regulations now fit under "Keynesian Economics"." You're right, they don't tell you.. it's because regulations make it easier for the government to control the economy. Which is one of the things that Keynes talked about extensively when it came to government spending and control in the economy.
D34thSetX 4 months ago
@wintereis57 "Instead of trying to raise the rest of the world's standards, many want to lower ours to compete with third world countries." It's none of our business to impose what we think onto others, the standards that we have today actually came about through Capitalistic tendencies. When politicians saw that child labor was declining they outlawed it to take credit for what the market was already doing. We cannot impose our standards on countries that aren't near our tech. level.
D34thSetX 4 months ago
keynesian economics is as american as apple pie. Lest you want to live in 1892
jbt4673 4 months ago
@jbt4673 Nope, before 1913 we were perfectly fine economically.
ValeriyaAviva 4 months ago
@ValeriyaAviva
If you think crippling depressions are perfectly fine, then yes.
jbt4673 4 months ago
this is based on a very basic misunderstanding of keynes. He was a conservative and only proposed "keynesian" solutions during times of extreme crisis like the depression (or now). Additionally, his point was not that creative destruction is helpful, but that infusing money into the economy during times of monetary drought can be helpful in and of itself. He did say it should be productive if at all possible, which this trite shit ignores completely. Look up Joe Stiglitz for abetter explanation.
psbjr 4 months ago
This is more analogous to the broken window fallacy. One could make the case that the military industrial complex is guilty of this. Keynesian adherents though, they stand somewhere between free market and planned economy. I would say they carry a god complex in thinking that they can control something as vast as a modern economy even with the research that goes in to it. Ever tried even just counting the number of products in a Walmart? Next, try New York.
AndreisEntaro 4 months ago
When the disaster in Japan hit, some people actually thought it would be good for their economy, since it would create all sorts of jobs lol. Why not just carpet bomb New York, think of all the jobs it will create.
The stupity of the worlds "intellectuals" never cease to amaze me.
groam6666 4 months ago
@groam6666 It wasn't the intellectuals saying that, anyone who did fails to understand the broken window fallacy. Although destruction appears to create jobs on the outset, the fact remains that people would have spent their money on other things had they not suffered a loss. In the end either situation will create more jobs but the destructive scenario still leaves the world sans whatever was destroyed.
The same issue occurs with planned obsolescence.
AndreisEntaro 4 months ago
@AndreisEntaro What can I say, I agree with you.
groam6666 4 months ago
I love this video coupled with the title. Thanks for making my day.
EuroAmericanReich 4 months ago
I'll take it one step further, essentially making people dig holes and then filling them back up will create jobs. Will it create any real growth in the long run? no. In this way money is like oil in an engine.
redarrowhead2 4 months ago 20
@redarrowhead2 we're all dead in the long run who cares ;p
CampanionCube 4 months ago
@redarrowhead2 It would be way much more effective with an atomic bomb! That would make us superrich!!!
larsiemannen 4 months ago
Comment removed
redarrowhead2 4 months ago
@DavidFromHB the publication of the book doesn't mean Keynes didn't hold his theory or make prescriptions earlier. Are you suggesting he developed the theory as he wrote the book? It's debatable about whether keynesian economics pulled us out of the depression or we got out of it in spite of Keynesian economics. I would suggest that the belief that Keynesian economics pulled us out of the depression is "what allowed his theory to come into" general practice.'
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
HAHAHA! Great example. Ron Paul 2012!
spcsockrman2 4 months ago
Holy shit... is this really YouTube? These comments appear to be approaching an intelligent discussion.
soupwell 4 months ago
Sadly, the socialists making the movie were probably meaning the above clip to be an attack on the GOOD economic argument that you should allow businesses to fail, instead of bailing them out.
Of course it doesn't make any sense in that light, but then again bailing out failed businesses doesn't make any sense, either, so they had to shift the argument a bit in order to make it work.
KAZVorpal 4 months ago
Urgh. I didn't know you were an anarcho-capitalist.
*VOMITS*
mojorhythm 4 months ago
@mojorhythm Lol so you like keynesian economics?
gutzs 4 months ago
@gutzs Post-Keynesian economics. Not Neo or New Keynesians.
mojorhythm 4 months ago
@mojorhythm Austrian economics for me, thank you.
gutzs 4 months ago
@mojorhythm
thinking keynsianism is mostly wrong does not automatically make me an AnCap. I am a mutualist.
SpectacularNumanist 4 months ago
@SpectacularNumanist OH, that's alright then.
mojorhythm 4 months ago
Mind saying where this is from?
maosef 4 months ago
I cherry in water? Man... the future has some pretty gay cocktails
Romeowasbleeding1 4 months ago 2
The planner can not claim to control all the cherries.
stalin53 4 months ago
El planificador no puede pretender controlar todas las cerezas.
stalin53 4 months ago
We were about 2 seconds from an Austrian rebuttal.
KenMacMillan 4 months ago
@KenMacMillan
No, he just chokes on the berry and the guy says something about how technology couldnt save him. which sounds very anti austrian infact.
SpectacularNumanist 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus There is a distinction between seeing a crash coming and knowing what damage it will do. Also are you suggesting, then that Keynes was a good economist until he was made a bad economist by not seeing the crash coming? It makes him a bad economist in the same way it makes you a bad thinker when you fail to see the difference between advocacy and observation.
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@sp1ke0kill3r Theories are judged by their predictive power. If his theories don't correlate with reality, they are obviously faulty.
worldofdraculas 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@worldofdraculas I would think theories should be judged by how well they work rather than by their predictive power. But what exactly is your point? Is it that because Keynes "didn't see the stock market crash coming in 1929 his theory is faulty?"
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@sp1ke0kill3r
"There is a distinction between seeing a crash coming and knowing what damage it will do."
Even if only his quantitative prediction was wrong, then I still think it's permissible to criticize him for that. Remember, his theory holds that qualitative prediction is possible with scientific accuracy, and his own epistemological framework is based around empiricism and falsifiability. And if you look at what he was actually saying about the present state of the economy shortly -
-
PanzerDivisionBOM 4 months ago
-
- before the start of the Great Depression, then I think there's a good case to be made that even his qualitative predictions were false. Add to that the realization that his policy prescriptions were a causal factor in bringing about the Depression, and I think we may fairly denounce him as a second coming of John Law. -
-
PanzerDivisionBOM 4 months ago
-
- "Also are you suggesting, then [...]"
No, the validity of Keynes' theory did not change in that instant. His failure to predict the Great Depression is merely an indication of a much greater, ongoing failure of his.
Consider the implications of early satellite reflection experiments for Newton's mechanics. The experiment did not cause Newton's theory to become incorrect, but merely revealed its incorrectness to our scientific understanding.
PanzerDivisionBOM 4 months ago
@PanzerDivisionBOM I don't think you can answer the question posed to someone else. I doubt you know what Lupy was trying to argue. Unless you are him pre. I never proposed he was thinking that it changed "in that instant". A "greater, ongoing failure', huh? Lions and Tigers and Bears ! Oh my! "the implications of early satellite reflection experiments"? Suppose I consider the implications of you not saying anything specific for you actually understanding Keynes, or Great Depression
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@PanzerDivisionBOM "a good case to be made that even his qualitative predictions were false. " and those were? (with citations please) and what were the "policy prescriptions (again citations?) Please explain how they were causal. So far you've managed to say a whole lot of nothing. Perhaps I should say your propositions as an expression of your epistemic framework, minimize the quantitative dimension of analysis
therby undermining the qualitative prediction..
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@PanzerDivisionBOM "if only his quantitative prediction was wrong" Which was? The point was that losing money didn't prove Keynes didn't see it coming. I don't recall saying one couldn't criticize Keynes or his followers. There is plenty to criticize. But does that mean they should be criticized for things they never advocated like "proposing things like alien invasions[or] war" . As to the "scientific accurracy and epistemic framework, can you source those claims please?
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
soooooo, we should all take sledge hammers to our cars, homes, and property?
iluvpoliticzz 4 months ago
Sometimes destruction of entire industries happens because of the ego's of various peoples in many multifacted organizations who all think they know what is best. Destruction & capital flight happens because of a simple loss of confidence in exsisting institutions & established traditions (that thru time ) become outdated and dull. It's inievitable... As mice we need to look for new cheese... that's about it.
ctelable 4 months ago
The "broken window fallacy"
pleasewaittovoteagai 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus and that is relevant to the discussion how? Is that really all you have left? Assuming what you say is true, does that magically make Keynes a bad economist? If so does that mean his grasp of economics is then frozen for the rest of his life at that point? Does it mean he could never have any good ideas? Or does bringing it up mean you really did get your education in the same place your farts come from. Do you mistake them for fresh air and inhale deeply?
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
Frederic Bastiat would have a few things to say about this!
ChristopherAdderley 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus clever. And all that from a collitch education. Your folks must be proud. They spent all that money and this is the result.
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus And yet, Foofy this was not a proposal. In fact, Krugman says it was a thought experiment.Of course, Krugman wasn't actually "proposing things like alien invasions'. He was talking about what scale of spending he considers necessary to end the recession. He mentions an alien invasion because it's a way of drawing attention;getting people talking about his underlying argument. I don't see any mention-much less a proposal- of war in this quote, but then you're the "educated one"
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus Indeed, poopypants. you can't even trust yourself to support your own argument by presenting the "evidence" for it. Probably because you either made it up or believed someone else who did. One thing for certain, you didn't read it. Not to mention you're so dense you fail to grasp that just because a follower of Keynes proposes something, doesn't mean it's Keynesian.
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
Breaking a window and gashing a hand is twice as effective I say, why not take it all the way. Shoot yourselves because there are medics, cops, firefighters, funeral homes, and so many more like Joe who runs the crematorium, that need you!
AngryHateMusic 4 months ago
@FenrirLupus Keynes nor his followers ever proposed any such thing. Perhaps you outta stop checking where your farts come from for facts.
sp1ke0kill3r 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
voting for Ron Paul no more bush tactics end the patriot act stop the feds time for sound money and bring the troops home from a primitive war that is making the wall street rich off the blood of our troops bring the states back for the people by the people
Trigun914 4 months ago
Keynes = commercial failure + government subsidy.
Hey let's subsidize failure and keep obsolete systems "in business" at the expense of the taxpayer! Who cares if the agrarian society is no longer needed, let's keep em around and let em put Corn Syrup in everything! Diabetes for all!
ReaganGoldwaterBuckl 4 months ago 33
@ReaganGoldwaterBuckl Agriculture is needed, only without the subsidies many American farmers would not be able to compete with agriculture-intensive nations. This can also be done using tariffs on agricultural imports. Subsidies, tariffs, capital controls, etc all have similar effects, they protect infant or adult industries from superior foreign industries. All developed nations used these methods to get to where they are today. It is not awarding failure.
redarrowhead2 4 months ago
@redarrowhead2 And how would you know that? There are many crops not subsidized. How do they compete?
A domestic farmer has huge advantages over importers. Getting taxes and regulations off their backs would help more.
What subsidies do is encourage farmers to grow certain crops that are water intensive. Other crops would have been grown instead without subsidies. That's why there are water shortages in California. They grow certain crops they otherwise not be growing.
joepeeler34 4 months ago
@redarrowhead2 Why should I have to suffer from a tariff for the benefit of a special interest? It's mercantalism. A small group of people benefit at the expense of hundreds of millions. Everyone is poorer in the long-run because those people who benefit from that one tariff lose out with hundreds of other tariffs that they don't benefit from.
The only way a specific tariff recipient could benefit is if no other tariffs were allowed. That never happens.
joepeeler34 4 months ago
@ReaganGoldwaterBuckl Uh, duh, um . . . did yeah ever think that maintaining a significant agricultural sector might actually be a part of a good national security plan. Especially if you have a nation of over 300 million people. Nope. You didn't because you are too stupid to realize that food comes in handy in a crisis. I'm willing to bet you are a Christian. You might want to brush up on the story of Joseph. Yeah, having food stores was a good idea then too.
wintereis57 4 months ago
@ReaganGoldwaterBuckl Or they can sit around unemployed at home doing nothing.... thus NOT adding to the great chain of life.
makeithappen42zx 4 months ago
"Instead of working on cold fusion the robots where quite happy cleaning up smashed glass after smashed glass..."
murrchops 4 months ago
What movie is this?
09Discovery 5 months ago
@09Discovery 5th Element.
BrokenArcade 5 months ago
@BrokenArcade Thanks man
09Discovery 4 months ago
i dont like keynesianism because jobs for the sake of jobs are simply the worst thing ever. i dont give a shit whether they help the economy because the people can spend stuff. when you work (join the military or whatever) that is a part of your life. so if it's meaningless work then that isn't enjoyable or anything.
maxgunn555 5 months ago
Hmm, put this way, it sounds like something Ayn Rand would have hated. This scene reminds me of a part in Atlas Shrugged where a large steel industry owner is made obsolete by 'progress', or the discovery of a new steel. He is protected by a government that thinks he should be spared this atrocity, because it would harm this man and his business.
That'd be like if we had to pay a steam engine investor for failing to see that it would become obsolete, and taxing his "offenders" to make it fair.
MontajBlaze 5 months ago
@MontajBlaze great example of meaningles economy. if the business isnt doing good then it shouldnt do good - it's as simple as that. the more ilearn about complex issues the more surreal this world becomes. and the big presidents and prime ministers dont seem as clever and awe inspiring as they did when i was younger.
maxgunn555 5 months ago
Right. But what happened before the Great Depression was an inflation of the money supply. Gene Smiley has shown that prices declined & then rose (production increased incredibly in the 1920s, but the Fed had attempted to keep prices stable) in the twenties, which kept the CPI stable, helping to lead to the Roaring Twenties. Once the bubble burst, all the inflation disappeared- leading to deflation. Hayek's conversation with Keynes regarding inflation took place six weeks before Keynes' death.
Goodatconnect4 5 months ago
If only Bastiat were there to set things straight...
BagofHay 5 months ago
Broken Glass = WAR
reggnob 5 months ago
is it just me or is Zorg, Jack Hunter's (aka. the Southern Avenger)
Evil Twin, lol?
watch?v=OkKKt_iy_hY
fast forward to @3:45 in the link above
KartChampion 5 months ago
fucking exactly!!!
broken window fallacy
TheBlitz1 5 months ago
@Ujamesl978 The state is the biggest overhead(explotation) that society(individuals) have to suffer in the history of mankind.
Mr. SecularNumanist thanks for the kind satire, a fine way to start my week.
megatherium100 6 months ago
This is a strawman. But still funny. lolz
Esoparagon 6 months ago
This is not Keynes, from what I understand. Keynes did not advocate this type of behavior. He advocated the iduction of money into the private sector. not the reallocation of money in the private sector. Am I wrong?
GTdnrSTANG 6 months ago
I've heard Keynes' arguments, but have not yet read all his works. From what I have heard, though, it was his followers who really bastardized his message. For instance, after WWII had ended a follower named Alvin Hansen said that the government should continue to spend money on tanks and weapons lest our economy collapse. Keynes' followers were also the ones clamoring for large inflation, whereas Hayek notes that Keynes had told him that he would never advocate such a thing.
Goodatconnect4 6 months ago
Creative destruction, It´s actually more Schumpeter. Try looking him up on wikipedia. By breaking the class someone eventually will invent the plastic cup.... Clever a.....
MortenDanPedersen 6 months ago
He is confusing the Broken Window Fallacy with Creative Destruction.
mikemat3307 8 months ago
It's dead and END THE FED
kenjams 8 months ago
Ok but what happened 5 seconds later?
AsymmetricalWarfare 8 months ago 5
@AsymmetricalWarfare he choked on his own penis
SecularNumanist 8 months ago 37
Free markets are characterized by booms, bubbles, and busts. Keynes argues that we can do something useful to help, and that in some cases coordination and regulation are preferable to having recurrent depressions. He never advocated destroying anything that I am aware of. Classical liberals are the ones who destroy, destroy the financial system, confidence, jobs and lives.
MrKongatthegates 9 months ago
So "destroy" is actually "create".
And "left" is "right", "down" is "up", "stupid" is "smart", etc.
How about "Evil" is "Good".
Goohuman 9 months ago
WOW how can you people argue over this video?
its just stupid.
atmark666 11 months ago
Hmm, I think you have misunderstood Keynesian economics. Though it has been a long time since I have dealt with this, I feel I´m on safe ground stating that your video had just about nothing to do with what Keynes
theories. I get that you are an anarchist and thus dislike governments, but who cares, because anarchist economics will suffer the same problems Keyne wanted to fix, being that many people will cheat and are not to be trusted. And my guess is you have no working solution.
JRBendixen 11 months ago
@JRBendixen
i give your comment an A+
GnomesAmok 9 months ago
@JRBendixen It appears you said a lot, without saying anything. Can you elaborate on keynesian economics and perhaps point out the problems of the free market that he tried to fix? Then we could at least compare those problems to those caused by keynesian economics.
Cheers.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua Ok, bare with we and excuse me for the name calling ect. that is to come. Your comment shows that you either know nothing about Keynesian economics are a moron or had very bad teachers. Do not feel to bad about it though, I´m no genius either. That said, It´s not really so that Kaynes ideas are to be explained in a comment section or by insane videos.
Rather my point was that SecularNumanist economical and political views has no solution for the real world problems he tried to fix.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua Quote I´m no specialist on the subject, though I can make statements as..
A) Kensian economics are based on state regulated trade, which is why it works in the current state of affairs and also the way almost all successful countries to a degree work.
B) Anarchist economics are generally based on unregulated person to person barter trade, it just sux. so it´s on the dunghill of ideas.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen anarchic economies would almost certainly develop trade using precious metals without the state to impose paper currency on them. there's no reason to think people would result to barter, people throughout history have used gold and silver as currency... it's not that hard.
purebacon 8 months ago
@daobagua Lastly, I will reread up on the subject and answer your specific problems/questions. Meaning that you can make me reread up on a subject you probably never read anything about and share it without any name calling(I promise), if you can answer this question:
Which single word for an entity makes Keynesian- and anarchist economics incompatible. It´s incredible easy.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen I am assuming that the single word is likely "Government". Keynesian economics says that the government should save in the good times and spend when the business cycle hits a down turn. This spending will artificially increase demands and promote jobs. The jobs will employ people, who make wages, and then create actual demand hopefully pulling out of the recession earlier. Anarchist economics... Is this simular to laise fair capitalism? Cheers.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua I was looking for the word "state", but government is quite close enough. So you can go ahead ans ask away, though it may be some time before I answer, because I have to read up on the bloody stuff. And for the rest of your comment you are quite right right. The only thing lacking is the major mechanics he stated as premises.
But who cares, you did what I could not and made me look like a fool, so cheers.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua Though I have to ask why do you compare a pure barter system with capitalism, as these are and cannot be the same. The one can easily contain as an example futures while the other cannot. In other words would an anarchist system have a wallstreet?
I know that it´s I´m that has to answer, but I have already stated that it was I who was the fool, so I ask you to bare with me.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua Also can you explain what the video has to do with Keynsian economics?
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen Both Zerg and Keynes (as he is now interpreted) are more concerned with simply keeping people employed (doing anything) then actually producing things of value. (this is known as a broken window fallacy, see above comments) This is the difference between government control economics and free market based ecomomics.Furthermore, I never argued with you on whether his video is precisly defined keynesian economics, I said that you did not add any value to the conversation. Now please do
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua paraphrazing:" Zerg ie. Keynes is more concerned with simply keeping people employed then actually producing things of value." Sure, but keynes never as far as I know would argue that destruction was a means to an ends or the end goal as zorg does. That is the way of the anarchists in general. And yes keynes never actually did work with the limitations of supply horizons, as is the reality of today. I like keynes though he has some faults regarding here and now.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen Keynes was very smart, but peoples interpretations of him have resulted in a government spending spree that far succeeds his expectation. Zerg says destruction creates jobs. This is a broken window fallacy (obviously). A little more subtle is government spending to create jobs. What you see is the government creating jobs with its spending, but what is not shown is that the government got that money through taxes, which decreased spending and thus jobs.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua And yea unemployment are still far more important than production value, for most countries of the world, because it simply makes money for the whole of the society and calms social unrest.
Also I´m working in the building industry in Denmark and we have to to look at limitations of supply horizons as we have almost no natural resources and I must say things are looking very grim. For example It is estimated that we cannot get hold of zink in any useful quantity in about 20 years.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen (5) I always wanted to go to demmark, hope to go in a few years. But probably back to japan this year. I work in the power gen industry, and I know what you mean about supply horizons. I think the only solution in the next 50 years is going to be nuclear. If we learn to store energy better, then renewables will be able to take more of the pie, but that might be a long way out. Any thoughts?
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua Firstly Denmark rock and sux, it really depends. Ahh fek I could tell you a loads more of our culture than I have the time for now.
Quote:I´m not sure but I have heard it suffers the same supply issues and no european nation have politically solved the permanent vaste storage problem and I doubt the politicians ever will.
We work very hard to make the building-mass of Denmark more energy efficient. It´s going ahead but the task is vast.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen That must be why you pay the highest electricity rates in the EU.
MrGreeneggsnham 8 months ago
@MrGreeneggsnham Yes and what is your point. I do not get it.
JRBendixen 8 months ago
@JRBendixen central economic planning = fail
MrGreeneggsnham 8 months ago
@MrGreeneggsnham So high electicity costs makes for a failure of economic.
I do not agree, because while you may think this is a clear cut issue, for me It´s mostly about what I get for my money spent on electricity.
JRBendixen 8 months ago
@JRBendixen What you get is less for more money and a lower standard of living. That extra cash could have been spent on something else.
If it's such a great thing then why not overpay for everything?
MrGreeneggsnham 8 months ago 2
@daobagua We have the largest amount of living-space per person in the world as far as I know. So the only true energy solution will be to get people to live in smaller homes and that is political suicide. Go figure. Our other actions like harsh demands on things like insulation has had it´s effect but is just about exhausted for value. We really have to demolish a huge number of buildings also very difficult. Besides we recycle 98% of all building materials.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua I would focus on communal infrastructure. But then again a huge amount of danes cycle to work , nonetheless I think it can have an effect. Further we should also focus on people working more at differentiated work places nearer their home if not from home(that is also widespread). Almost needless to say most danes work in a chair in front of a computer. So I´ll go for renewal of the building mass, infrastructure and extreme research and education efforts.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua One thing. Working on infrastructure tends to be an universal good thing , but as I just argued with some of my family today. If we are going to be 8-10 billion, well then the clay for bricks will run up as it has almost done in Denmark. And the problems extends as you know farther than that. I refuse to judge who should get hold of the clay and whom cannot, but I also know that the powerful will take it all. Solutions, well I truly have none, I´m too dumb and It´s just too big for me.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@daobagua Quote:" I said that you did not add any value to the conversation. Now please do" I usually try to think in terms of practical solutions in every case: I do not think that I have any that are adequate on the scale we are speaking. I´m just not that smart.
I have ideas for working solutions for specified local problems but none for the world. If I should have a go, I think firms should stopped being treated as personal individuals. But that solves just about the least of problems.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen I should also point out that I am not an advocate of an anarchist enonomic policy. Nor do I think Secularnumanist is (at least from this video, but I have not seen any others). I think his point is valid, it matters what they money is spent on, not just that it creates jobs. Warren buffett said it well, he could spend money building statues and then destroying them, that would raise the GDP, but nothing productive would come of it. We need to rethink the governments role in this.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua Quote:"I should also point out that I am not an advocate of an anarchist enonomic policy" I never thought so, but I hoped that you would make a stance.
Quote:"it matters what they money is spent on, not just that it creates jobs" I never got that his videos point was needless creation of jobs. Rather I thought it was meant to illustrate a weird cycle of destruction and jobs. Which is a ridiculous parody of keynes ideas and what goes on in reality.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@JRBendixen Yes that might be a ridiculous parody of keynes (that man was smart). But it is interesting to note how much government funding is spent on an oversized military industrial complex. This is essentially spending money to create tools, that destroy themself and other things, so that we can then spend more government money, giving company's grants to rebuild said destroyed nations. I am not saying all military is bad, but it seems to be a first reaction now a days.
daobagua 9 months ago
@JRBendixen Since you asking me to take a stand on my economic policy I will (but I must remain tongue in cheek, for I do not know all the facts of everything). I think the government provides useful services in police, national protection and a judicial system for free people to settle disputes. In markets that have no government judicial system (black markets), typically minor disputes (he ripped me off) end up in serious violence. I think this is destructive to society, so I support gov here.
daobagua 9 months ago
@JRBendixen (3) But the government spending money on programs to try and stimulate the economy is another thing. While jobs do matter, so does useful production. Without useful production, any stimulation simply prolongs the inevitable. Dot com burst to housing bubble and burst (what bubble is next).
If the government wanted to stablize the cycle, it could provide money to people (in form of tax cuts or a check). That way, at least, people who stimulate the economy for products they can use.
daobagua 9 months ago
@JRBendixen (4) If government made no mistakes, then it would not be a problem to have them with there hands in the economy (even if they were not the most efficient). The problem I see is the the government sometimes makes logical and policy mistakes, this pushes the economy in the wrong direction and worsens recessions. Ex) During the great depression, the FED gold reserves increased, and yet the FED decreased the country money supply (did not print enough), this hurt the economy further.
daobagua 9 months ago
@daobagua Do not get me wrong, I have at times argued that we have to rethinking our economics because of the former mentioned supply horizons. I mean what is the worth of a human society producing 5.000 types of chips. It´s I dilemma for me, I will not stop it though I think it is insane. The allocation of resources is just well insane.
I fear the threshold for a possible fair and viable global economy is far in past. Nonetheless I´m also positive.
JRBendixen 9 months ago
@shadowgeyser My last statement was pretty specific from the question that was asked. The fact that DKshadow doesn't think that price controls are somehow significant to Austrian economics shows how dumb he is. Also, you didn't really correct me about praxeology since I didn't really disagree with what you were saying and you never really seemed to disagree with me.
BlackFlame281 11 months ago
@BlackFlame281 Where did I say price controls aren't significant to Austrian economics? Prices are vitally important to Austrian economics, like interest rates for example, which ties in with the Austrian Business Cycle Theory. I said Austrians will never say: a lack of price controls will lead to full employment. Because employment isn't the goal i.e. the ends of an economy, employment is just a means to an end. Try again without the straw-man.
DKshad0w 11 months ago
@shadowgeyser Mises rejected the idea that empirical evidence could be applied to any social science because of the problem of induction. Where did Mises concede that empirical evidence could be used? I know of only one place but he implicitly stated this but never recognized it as such.
BlackFlame281 11 months ago
@shadowgeyser Has nobody here actually read Austrian economics? Praxeology is an epistemological entry point of Austrian economics. Say's Law explains how markets clear. Without this law, much of the explanation of how the market works comes into jeopardy. Also, most Austrians have given up praxeology (especially on YT) since much of their later work relies on empirical evidence.
BlackFlame281 1 year ago
@BlackFlame281 You used Somalia as it is today as counter-evidence against Austrian Theory. I am curious, In you mind how SHOULD Somalia be like today if Austrian Theory is correct?
DKshad0w 1 year ago
@DKshad0w Well, the state has returned to Somalia so I'm not necessarily talking about today. However, the state does very little to interfere in the market. How should Somalia look? According to me, it looks just like it should. High unemployment, massive inflation, and markets that don't clear. But according to Austrian theory, flexible wages and prices should lead to full employment with all(most) resources being utilized.
BlackFlame281 1 year ago
@BlackFlame281 Austrians will never say no price controls will lead to full employment. Labor is just a resource like any other in the free market, prices coordinate resources to their most productive use. Employment doesn't really matter to the Austrians, you can have make-work projects like digging ditches and have full employment. What do you mean by all(most) resources being utilized? How do you measure that?
DKshad0w 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Zerg is a corporate ruler. He is NOT GOVERNMENT. He is expressing Friedmanism gone all the way. The belief in a "free market" ala Ron Paul is essentially a religious belief. It is faith. Faith is no way to run any system in the real world. Keep your faith in your church... and your free market fantasies there too. Keynes works and is the most fair to the most people until we find an even more Socially Democratic way to make sure that people who work hard keep what they earn.
Corporations8MyBaby 1 year ago
@Corporations8MyBaby
Corporations are a result of government grants.
And I know he wasnt a govenment official, im just saying his philosophy sounds like keynsianism brought to its logical conclusion.
Now please tell me how the use of government works to boost employment as an end in and of itself resembles Friedman.
Secondly tell me why I should give a fuck about Friedman.
SecularNumanist 1 year ago 18
@SecularNumanist "Corporations are a result of government grants."
Well, under the current economic system governments do in large part perpetuate corporate power. However, I'm not convinced that in a free market cartelization and other general abuses of power wouldn't occur. Sure, the companies can't use the government to crowd out competition, but who says there will be enough individual incentive, organization, and resources to fight the ologopic businesses.
synchronium24 1 year ago
@SecularNumanist (2) Other social or economic forces can still be in play to muck up the playing field. So how would a free market deal with cartels forming in the first place or at least getting rid of them once they emerged/exist already? I mean really, what's to stop Stodels from running the marketplace?
I realize your video had more to do with Keynesian demand for a valueless product, but that ain't my main beef here.
synchronium24 1 year ago
@Corporations8MyBaby Retarded statism at it's best: Thinking that Corporatism = Free Market
breakingthe4thwall 10 months ago
@Corporations8MyBaby Belief in the state is much more akin to belief in religion. The power of the state rests solely on belief in the state much like a church. You also have people erecting statues of dead presidents and carving their faces into the side of a mountain. The indoctrination of children in government schools at a young age. Government schools teach children to respect authority, not to question authority and accept all info they recieve from authority and not to question info.
MrGreeneggsnham 8 months ago
@Corporations8MyBaby You speak of Keynes and "Social Democracy" as fervently as any pastor speaks of religion.
Shanockdotcom 6 months ago
@Corporations8MyBaby you are truly an idiot aren't you?
daPlumber702 6 months ago
@Corporations8MyBaby the most fair to the most people and for people to keep what they earn is to NOT TAX IT AWAY from them and just let them keep what t hey work for
KingofComputing 6 months ago
@Corporations8MyBaby Friedman, though he had great ideas, also called for to much government intervention. Say, Hayek, Mises. Those are men who knew that the free market is the most fair to the most people, and launches the human race by leaps and bounds when it is allowed to work properly. What we have now is crony capitalism, that is all Keynes believed in. The government should choose which sectors get government funds and resources. Instead of market forces which are more accurate.
metzger90 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@