07-12-2011, 06:40 PM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
__________________
太初有道 |
|
07-13-2011, 03:49 AM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
When Keynesianism is discussed, rather than articulate an intelligent critique you instead focus on lumping all Keynesians in as Marxists (or people who are well on their way to Marxism because, after all, they must all truly hate capitalism). There's just nothing empirical to support that bizarre contention. Like Chino, I'm struggling to understand your economic philosophy as it appears, to me, to lack any cohesion or consistency from our brief exchanges. It also appears to rely on a belief that competing philosophies are inherently Marxist and evil (which suggests not much thought has gone into your analysis). Other statements you make about Keynesianism are just false (such as your argument that it doesn't take into consideration crowding). As I mentioned before, there are legitimate issues with Keynesianism just as there are with Friedman's philosophies, but we can't seem to even get to those topics because of the muddled rhetoric you are throwing out instead. I'm going to bow out of this discussion as it seems particularly pointless. |
|
07-13-2011, 01:51 PM | #13 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
I have both an intellectual disagreement with Keynesian and a personal one. None of the Keynesians policies benefit me. Remember the inflation tax, how the uninformed voter blames the rise in prices on business? I realize inflation for example is a tax incurred by Keynesians financial policies. I also don't trust policy makers to do things in a timely or correct and morally beneficial manner. I have repeatedly stated Obama's plan is fraught with error in that it did NOT achieve its multiplier effect as shown in the Stanford study. So, when I attack you Keynsians coherently, you ignore my attacks. And because Friedman attacks, as do others, attack the motives of policy wonks who adhere to Keynesian economics, I attack them less well, but liken them to Marxists who loathe the capitalist system. Again, you are engaging in ad hominems because you ignore the true arguments. Maybe you should start from a neutralist position if you wish to understand my philosophy.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
07-13-2011, 08:51 PM | #14 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
Are you talking about this Stanford study? http://www.stanford.edu/~johntayl/CCTW_100108.pdf The study argues that ARRA didn't achieve the intended multiplier effect NOT because the multiplier was too big, but the multiplier was applied to the wrong number.
__________________
太初有道 |
|
07-14-2011, 02:46 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
__________________
太初有道 |
Bookmarks |
|
|