| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front Economy |
| Keynes and the triumph of hope over economics |
| 2009-02-07 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #4 Whoops, wrong thread. |
| Posted by: ed 2009-02-07 15:14 |
| #3 "He is a community organizer like Jesus was," That should every discussion where Obama's name is mentioned. Thanks Susan Sarandon! |
| Posted by: ed 2009-02-07 15:13 |
| #2 "Keynes would tend to inhibit the fastest growers in order to boost the slower growers. The end result is that the Keynesian manager ends up spending billions of dollars in ... micromanagement and ends up with little overall gain." That describes Bambi and the Dems pretty accurately, crosspatch. >:-( |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2009-02-07 12:31 |
| #1 When I was taking economics, it was pretty much given that the Milton Friedman school trumped the Keynesian school of economics. Keynes is basically used to validate the policies of more socialist politicians but it injects so much inefficiency that it really doesn't work. Imagine you have a forest for lumber production and a fire has come through and burned your best trees. A Keynesian forest manager would engage in a lot of resource redistribution in an attempt to make all the trees exactly the same size. A Friedman school manager would clear out all the dead wood, maybe chip it up and put it down as mulch, get rid if the scrawny trees and after providing for a better general environment, let things pretty much grow as they will. Keynes would tend to inhibit the fastest growers in order to boost the slower growers. The end result is that the Keynesian manager ends up spending billions of dollars in forest micromanagement and ends up with little overall gain. |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2009-02-07 12:24 |