Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Keynes was right?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Keynes was right?

    and leave it to none other than one of the dot.bomb bubble blowers to come up with this one...

    but i'll bet krugman is cheering, since hey!
    if deficts in the hundreds of billions was The Problem and OUTRAGEOUS the last time around, obviously BLOWING TRILLIONS is just what the doctor ordered, right?

    Well, It Sure Seems Like Keynes Was Right Henry Blodget | Dec. 17, 2011, 10:20 AM

    http://www.businessinsider.com/keynes-was-right-2011-12

    After the experience of the past five years, it certainly seems like John Maynard Keynes was right, doesn't it? It seems hard to conclude anything else.
    I'm not an economist, and I'm not born of a particular economic school that I've bet my life's work on, so I have observed the global economic events of the past five years with a fairly open mind.
    I've listened to Keynesians like Paul Krugman argue that the way to fix the mess is to open the government spending spigot and invest like crazy.
    And I've listened to Austerians like Niall Ferguson argue that the way to fix the mess is to cut spending radically, balance government budgets, and unleash the private sector.
    And I've also looked back at history--namely, Reinhart and Rogoff's analysis of prior financial crises, the Great Depression, Japan, Germany after Weimar, and so forth.
    And I have to say, the conclusion I keep coming back to is that Keynes was right.
    In the aftermath of a massive debt binge like the one we went on from 1980-2007, when the private sector collapses and then retreats to lick its wounds and deleverage, the best way to help the economy work its way out of its hole is for the government to spend like crazy.
    Or, rather, if not the "best way," at least the least-worst way.
    Because, obviously, piling up even bigger mountains of debt is not a happy side-effect of such spending.
    But let's face it: Austerity doesn't work.
    At least, austerity doesn't work to quickly fix the problem.
    The reason austerity doesn't work to quickly fix the problem is that, when the economy is already struggling, and you cut government spending, you also further damage the economy. And when you further damage the economy, you further reduce tax revenue, which has already been clobbered by the stumbling economy. And when you further reduce tax revenue, you increase the deficit and create the need for more austerity. And that even further clobbers the economy and tax revenue. And so on.
    Basically, austerity puts you into a death spiral in which you keep trying to cut your way to prosperity, but all you end up doing is digging a bigger hole. And in the meantime, tens of millions of people are out of work, the economy is retrenching, and everything is generally miserable. And how about the alternative?
    Well, die-hard anti-Keynesians will tell you that the alternative is what we're experiencing now. Obama did the big Keynesian stimulus thing a couple of years ago, and the economy is still lousy and the unemployment rate is still too high. And we have an absolutely massive debt pile that we need to work off.
    Ergo, Keynesianism doesn't work.
    But isn't that an unfair conclusion?
    Most of the debt mountain we've piled up is the result of what we did before the crisis, not after it. In the years leading up to 2007, our absurdly undisciplined leaders took a nice big budget surplus and then squandered it. And they created absurdly loose lending standards and encouraged the whole country to lever up and buy stuff we couldn't afford. And they never said "no" to anything except tax increases, no matter what, and denied all the structural problems that were building up for decades.
    And by 2007, they had put us in one hell of a hole.
    And, given that, it seems reasonable to think that, as Krugman has long argued, one of the problems with the economy now is that the original stimulus just wasn't big enough.

    And it also seems reasonable to conclude that, given the mess we got ourselves into, there is just no quick fix, regardless of what anyone does. And that, in fact, is my real conclusion about our current situation--that, no matter what anyone does, we're going to be licking our wounds for years.
    But I will also add this in defense of Keynesianism...
    The Austerians love to point at the 1930s as "proof" that Keynes was wrong. Look at the huge "New Deal," they say. Look at all those expensive public works projects. Look at all the spending the government did to try to get us out of the Great Depression, and it never really worked. What got us out of the Depression, the Austerians smugly observe, was World War 2.


    But what was World War 2 if not an absolutely gigantic Keynesian stimulus?
    Seriously.


    The Federal deficit in World War 2 was massive--much bigger than any time during the Great Depression. And we built up a huge Federal debt load. And... we set the stage for two decades of amazing prosperity, in which we worked off those debts.
    Our current debt and deficit situation scares the bejeezus out of me. We absolutely have to get our long-term budget problems under control, and doing so will involve both cutting spending and raising taxes. If we don't do that, we really will collapse, as Niall Ferguson et al have long been arguing.

    and more/the rest of this at: http://www.businessinsider.com/keynes-was-right-2011-12
    and right on cue, we have pannetta and hilary rattlin the sabres at iran....
    and it was cheney they accuse of wanting 'endless war'?

    sigh....
    i wish i had me one of them 'liberal arts' degrees, maybe i might sleep better at night.
    Last edited by lektrode; December 19, 2011, 04:41 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Keynes was right?

    sigh....
    i wish i had me one of them 'liberal arts' degrees, maybe i might sleep better at night.

    Sociology? Politics, History? All good stuff. Ye haf to reed alota stuff, like! Den ye haf to rite it. And God help you if you plagerise anything.

    Anyway, all them ism thingies are a load of sphericles. Not the Quantum Mechanics bit. They'r KO!

    I strongly encourage you. If you cannot get into a college: read as much as you can. Cheers.

    Brian

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Keynes was right?

      This is the same bloke who:-
      Had tea with Hitler & helped him set up the money system in the 3rd Rich
      Raped School boys
      Helped a KGB agent set up "Brent woods" agreement
      ?
      Mike

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Keynes was right?

        Parallel with what EJ said in his book, there are good dollars spent and bad dollar spent. Thing is the bankers and lawyers who make up congress can't tell a good dollar spent from a bad dollar spent. To them spending is spending. Did anyone take the time to figure out how that 750B stimulus money spent could help us as a nation become more productive? My bet is no. It's other people's money, and they just kicked it out the door to anyone who had their hands out and was connected.

        You know what really frosts me is in the fall of 09 after the 750B in spending, my company took up a collection to buy pencils for public school kids. What? we just pissed away 750B and kids in school don't have pencils????

        What about brown field rennovation?? There is lots of vacant factories in urban areas, yet we continue to build new ones
        farther and farther out, away from transportation links, away from workers etc. I'm sure some smart itulipers can come up with a big list of simple things we could have done with the money that would generate a positive return on the money.

        Yeah my 1000th post! crack open a cold one!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Keynes was right?

          Originally posted by charliebrown View Post
          Parallel with what EJ said in his book, there are good dollars spent and bad dollar spent. Thing is the bankers and lawyers who make up congress can't tell a good dollar spent from a bad dollar spent. To them spending is spending. Did anyone take the time to figure out how that 750B stimulus money spent could help us as a nation become more productive? My bet is no. It's other people's money, and they just kicked it out the door to anyone who had their hands out and was connected.

          You know what really frosts me is in the fall of 09 after the 750B in spending, my company took up a collection to buy pencils for public school kids. What? we just pissed away 750B and kids in school don't have pencils????

          What about brown field rennovation?? There is lots of vacant factories in urban areas, yet we continue to build new ones
          farther and farther out, away from transportation links, away from workers etc. I'm sure some smart itulipers can come up with a big list of simple things we could have done with the money that would generate a positive return on the money.

          Yeah my 1000th post! crack open a cold one!
          That is why money in public or private hardly seems to matter. The bankers and lawyers have all the private money and they run our government. Its all bad spending. Not me though. I consider my carboys capital equipment. Though what Roosevelt did was drop land prices because he brought land to life in the west with water projects. Anyone see a reason why we don't want a good train system in the US yet? That would drop land values(not near the train) and kill the banks.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Keynes was right?

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...D3O_story.html

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Keynes was right?

              They keep pushing that high speed rail stuff around here.

              If we just got the train system back to 1950's standard that would be a big improvement with off the shelf technology.
              The Zehphr could travel from Chicago to Denver in 12 hours. The current Amtrak route takes 17 hours.
              I'm sure an incremental improvement in tracks, and
              diesel tech could do it with less fuel and a faster average speed. If the train had wi-fi, I could do some amount of work an read itulip on the trip. Just a regular speed train with a good schedule would make shorter trips from Chicago
              to St. Louis, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Cincinnatti, and Detroit look very favorable compared to air transport. In longer trips, I noticed that stop overs, and indirect routing just kill the train as an alternative to air travel. It takes me an hour to drive to O'hare, and another hour to check in on a good day. Just like the airports, the stations would have to offer access to ground transport or rental cars, once I arrive.
              Last edited by charliebrown; December 20, 2011, 05:35 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Keynes was right?

                What got us out of the Depression, the Austerians smugly observe, was World War 2.
                It's amazing what destroying the productive capacity of 1/2 the developed world can do for those with the remaining equipment and personnel. Maybe the depression was over for those left alive in the US, but overall the results of WWII were pretty dismal. That's the dirty secret few folks ever seem to mention. The ROI on war spending is horrible. The ROI on war spending is even worse if you lose. In my opinion WWII didn't so much end the great depression, it merely made life so much worse for so many people the great depression ceased to be a concern. A fortunate few did benefit from the war, many of those happened to be Americans, but a good number of Americans also ended up far worse off (soldiers and their widows in particular).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Keynes was right?

                  +1 on that one. I would rather be poor than see our children used as cannon fodder.
                  Shortly after the war, U.S. debt / GDP went to 120%. I think the only reason we were able to pay this down was because
                  the rest of the industrialized world was blown up. I don't know how much oil and natural resources we were able to get our hands on as a result of the conquest too.

                  War is great for inflation. Borrow (create) money, then purchase something which will either sit in an arsenal and rot, or be blown up. Its the same as borrowing money to dig holes and fill them up.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Keynes was right?

                    Originally posted by Mega View Post
                    This is the same bloke who:-
                    Had tea with Hitler & helped him set up the money system in the 3rd Rich
                    Raped School boys
                    Helped a KGB agent set up "Brent woods" agreement
                    ?
                    Mike
                    The Third Reich - a country the size of the US State of Texas - went from being a territory with minimal industry and few natural resources, not even sufficient farmland, to a world power that nearly defeated your own nation, which by the way controlled a quarter of the globe. This was done in just six short years.

                    The economics of the Third Reich worked, and this is why it scares the bejesus out of the bankster class that resides in your capital city. The Third Reich was brought down by International Finance because it represented an existential threat to the globalist financial system. Now, the country that most closely follows the Third Reich is China, and no one would be crazy enough to start a war with them.

                    The reality is had London been conquered and every bankster haven confiscated as was done in Vienna, we would not be having the problems we do today. Certainly, there might be other problems.

                    But let's not pretend any particular nation has been particularly righteous in the past century.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Keynes was right?

                      Originally posted by LorenS View Post
                      It's amazing what destroying the productive capacity of 1/2 the developed world can do for those with the remaining equipment and personnel. Maybe the depression was over for those left alive in the US, but overall the results of WWII were pretty dismal. That's the dirty secret few folks ever seem to mention. The ROI on war spending is horrible. The ROI on war spending is even worse if you lose. In my opinion WWII didn't so much end the great depression, it merely made life so much worse for so many people the great depression ceased to be a concern. A fortunate few did benefit from the war, many of those happened to be Americans, but a good number of Americans also ended up far worse off (soldiers and their widows in particular).
                      And a forest fire gives birth to a new and healthier forest.

                      In materialistic terms, war might be a poor investment. But so too are many other human pursuits.

                      Humans are warriors. We will always fight over scarce resources, it is what we have evolved to do and what we always do.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Keynes was right?

                        Originally posted by Mega View Post
                        This is the same bloke who:-
                        Had tea with Hitler & helped him set up the money system in the 3rd Rich
                        Raped School boys
                        Helped a KGB agent set up "Brent woods" agreement
                        ?
                        Mike
                        Sources? Evidence?

                        Nuance?

                        A quick look at his Wikipedia entry turns up praise from unexpected sources:
                         
                        Bertrand Russell named Keynes one of the most intelligent people he had ever known, commenting:
                        Every time I argued with Keynes, I felt that I took my life in my hands and I seldom emerged without feeling something of a fool.

                        Wikipedia says:
                        Austrian School economist Friedrich Hayek was Keynes's most prominent contemporary critic, with sharply opposing views on the economy. Yet after Keynes's death he wrote:
                        He was the one really great man I ever knew, and for whom I had unbounded admiration. The world will be a very much poorer place without him.
                        For his part, Keynes praised Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom, writing to the Austrian economist that, "Morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with virtually the whole of it."

                        Also, here’s a very interesting comment about Keynes’ investing style:
                        Keynes was ultimately a successful investor, building up a private fortune. He was nearly wiped out following the Stock Market Crash of 1929, which he failed to foresee, but he soon recouped. At Keynes's death, in 1946, his worth stood just short of £500,000 – equivalent to about £11 million ($16.5 million) in 2009. The sum had been amassed despite lavish support for various causes and his personal ethic which made him reluctant to sell on a falling market that if too many did that it could deepen a slump.
                        If the thunder don't get you then the lightning will.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Keynes was right?

                          Keynesian economics must be disassociated with Keynesian policies.

                          Keynes himself had clearly opined that surpluses during the 'fat' years should be saved for spending during the 'lean' years.

                          However, Keynesian policies are used to justify spending no matter what or when.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X