The History of Economics

Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, William Stanley Jevons, Alfred Marshall and Lord John Maynard Keynes are considered. What made Keynes different from the classical economists who preceded him?

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• History
• of
• Economics
• Adam
• Smith
• David
• Ricardo
• John
• Stuart
• Mill
• William
• Stanley
• Jevons
• Alfred
• Marshall
• Maynard
• Keynes
• fiscal
• policy
• classical
• economics

[agapoua]

thank you very much you were very helpfull. I needed a simple answer in order to understand the 2 theories. If I have any other questions regarding international political economy will you answer me?

Thanks again!

[radiohogan]

Hi Agapoura:

Always.

Live and Be Well / Mike Hogan

[agapoua]

hello! can you tell what is the main difference between classical economics and keynesianism?

[radiohogan]

Hello Agapoua:

PartI:

Classical economists believe markets will find a new equilibrium without government intervention. That is, classical economists believe wages and prices will fall in a depression to levels that will cause capitalists to begin hiring and buying new plant and equipment. Classical economists believe this will continue until full employment is achieved.

Continued in Part II.

All the Best / Mike Hogan

[radiohogan]

Part II:

Keynesian economists observed depressions and saw the "free market" does not adjust as classicists claimed. Unemployment remained for decades.

Therefore, Keynes wrote the General Theory in 1936 recommending government intervene in Depressions with increased government spending and/ or tax cuts. This is called pump priming as a way to increase aggregate demand.

[zsylvana]

Hi Mike.Not much of a point i think.Rather silly.Also i got my share of rather nasty right wingers follow me in all my comments and try to insult me,try to make me angry i think,maybee be silent.One above claimed Austrian School beginned at 1930.I refered to Menger 1870 if it´s makes any difference,common wikipedia stuff,(i made some contributs to that article myself).Any one that would know more about dead Austrian Economists(and dead idees can check it out on Wikipedia)Be well Mike

[zsylvana]

Who do you think wrote the main part of that article?

[Salvysahagun]

@Ranger4564

No Keynes was the Worst Economist of ALL TIME. he invented rules and failed a debunking Says law.

If you really care about economics please study the American System. or American School

[Ranger4564]

@Salvysahagun In my opinion, Keynes merely saw, given enough time, capital would be accumulated in the hands of very few capitalists- concentration of capital. That accumulation places a brake on the economy as there isn't enough wealth around to facilitate production or consumption. Note not currency. Intervening is detrimental unless that money comes from the capital accumulated in the hands of the capitalists. If the money comes from taxing the poor, it's harmful as it starves the poor more.

[Salvysahagun]

The problem with the Classical School of Economics, was all they did was discover and acknolege laws of Economics. The reason European Economist where Free Market and Free Trade because they didn't want to try to mess with the laws. Keynesian Economics fails because demand is a function of bidding and bidding raises cost. (inflation) So the people who get the subside are happy but every one else gets more expensive products.

Please look into the American Depression of 1920 and Estonia recovery

[Yoonalm]

you are a legend. helps me heaps, thanks

[bailinnumberguy]

This guy seems reasonably intelligent, but he's all over the place. He jumps from topic to topic and injects his opinions out of the blue as if they're beyond dispute. Reasonably informative, but a little bit more focus might work better.

[minervx]

@elfornse

There is no empirical evidence to support the Austrian School theories. In fact, there is strong evidence that deflation worsens the economy.

[Ranger4564]

@Ranger4564 We must abandon the idea of free market, because it relies on an untenable detachment of human beings, in the name of an economy. Too often, economists focus on the fluid functioning of the economy, without concern for the impact or condition of the people an economy is meant to serve. That is the biggest flaw in Friedman / Hayek / Mises / Austrian and Chicago schools, etc. Arguing for the functioning of an economy while people suffer is the mistake.

[Ranger4564]

@Ranger4564 We live in a world that's not absolute, so any system which requires absolute conditions cannot exist and if attempted will fail. Even aside that, parts of an economy can work in one way, while other parts can work in other ways. Keynes is absolutely right, because in certain occasions, fear / disinterest stops the economy cold, even with plenty of wealth present (look at today people). In such conditions, we don't wait for "free marketeers" to get moving, while many in society die.

[Ranger4564]

It's sadly ironic that we live in a time when most people believe Keynes and Marx were mistaken, and that the free market Austrian / Chicago school approach works. What's not addressed is that even though government intervention is evident, it is free market components of the economy which failed miserably. Instead of failing, Keynes and Marx were 1000% correct in their projections. What free market ideologues don't understand is that we will never ever have an absolute free market.

[zsylvana]

@radiohogan Hello Mike.Another of this hallelujah freemarket evangelist,with 10 YouTube accounts singing the same nonscence as allways.He probarly appeared here before under some other names.And his comment is probarly ment to be some joke.Since Federal Reserve-USA was created as late as 1913 and it was uncountable periods of crises, bubbles and burst,inflation,to not mention Oligopolies and Monopoly before that & just for that reason Anti-Trust Laws and Federal Bank once was created in USA