Is Keynes correct?

[socca]

If you are rich (or believe you are rich), you tend to behave very differently than if you are poor (or believe that you are poor). The poor need to manage what little resources they have very effectively, while the rich can be irresponsible, inattentive, and wasteful.

The problem is that the (seemingly) unlimited borrowing capacity of our Federal, State, and local gov'ts fools our representatives into thinking that they are rich (it's other peoples' money, after all), and behaving accordingly. It really doesn't matter whether these officials label themselves as Republican or Democrat - looking at actual behavior as opposed to ideology they all appear the same to me.

I would much rather see our gov'ts use the resources they have much more efficiently and effectively rather than continuing to be grossly inefficient and ineffective and going off on another round of Keynesian deficit spending. It's not clear to me how concerned American citizens can force our gov'ts to go on a diet within the existing political system (they certainly won't go on a diet willingly).

[Free To Canoe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free To Canoe To stimulate the economy during a deflationary situation, one must somehow increase the money in circulation. True or false? I think it is enough to verify and discuss the one basic fact. That is my goal. Free to Canoe

Well, how did I do on my "goal"?

Since no one offered evidence to disprove it, I guess it must be so.
I see that not everyone agrees. I wonder how it would have went if I left Keynes out of it? His name seems to be incendairy.

I am aware that saving during good times is a part of the theory. That does not help us now. It seems that all of the other theories involve cutting taxes (tried that for 8 years without success) or do nothing and let the problem fix itself. I seems that our administration tried that without success up through 1932.

I guess evidence is hard to come by in the science of economics. It is mainly a science of probabilities and theories. Some of the concepts like the tragedy of the commons are very useful.

Like FDR, I am still searching for the one handed economist.

Free

[Alan]

During Gordon Brown and Tony Blair's 12 years at the helm of the British economy (Gordy was the Chancellor for about 8 years) the economy had fantastic growth.

At a recent speech he gave at Yale he was asked what he attributed that success to. I think folks were expecting some great economic theory in response.

His answer - "Luck"

However, his light-hearted comment to students in America is unlikely to amuse Mr Brown and will be seized on by the Conservatives as another blow to the Prime Minister's reputation for economic competence.
Mr Brown, who was Chancellor for the decade of Mr Blair's premiership, repeatedly claimed credit for the record run of consecutive quarters of growth while he was at the Treasury. He regularly used Budget speeches to champion his achievements.