The Mises Community
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Permanent Keynesian Refutation Thread

This post has 27 Replies | 12 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,247
Points 65,050
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
SystemAdministrator

I think the discussion in the comments section is good.

To darkness I condemn you...

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 157
Points 2,625

Selfish Bump.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 18
Points 540
razerfish replied on Wed, Aug 12 2009 6:29 PM

What about when Keynesians point out that there was no inflation in Japan's recession years of the late 80's through the 90's while their government expanded the money supply like crazy.  Krugman calls it a liquidity trap and proof that we won't necessarily have hyperinflation.  Why didn't Japan have inflation with all that growth in money supply?  

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,809
Points 49,985
Moderator

Question: I have not read Keynes General theory but I am told that it is confused and muddled. Does one need to read the General Theory in order to understand Hazlitt's criticisms?

'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 472
Points 8,810

Laughing Man:

Question: I have not read Keynes General theory but I am told that it is confused and muddled. Does one need to read the General Theory in order to understand Hazlitt's criticisms?

Yes, Keynes' GT is confusing. Hazlitt points this out in his intro. But don't worry - Hazlitt quotes extensively from the GT and even orders his chapters so they match up with Keynes' corresponding chapters.

Austrians do it a priori

Irish Liberty Forum 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 176
Points 3,970

Define Keynesianism. 

Keynesian isn't just a pejorative term for all the economics you don't like. You can't refute something you haven't defined.

If you mean the conept of sticky wages, that will be impossible to disprove theoretically.  Sticky wages are an empirically based assumption and so would need to be countered with evidence. 

If you mean fiscal stimulus as a way to relieve falling aggregate demand, that has already been discredited by almost the entire economics community, despite what certain public figures would like to have you believe.  Most New Keynesians don't believe in fiscal stimulus.

The only other aspect of Keynesianism I can think of that still gets mentioned is the liquidity trap, which relates to barriers on monetary policy.  If anything, this idea should be championed here.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 88
Points 1,345
WisR replied on Thu, Aug 13 2009 4:19 AM

Maybe because it's debt to GDP ratio went from something like 60% to 260%?  And because individaul savers financed all of the government borrowing?  

Remember, Keynsian spending can be funded by:

1) Taxes

2) Gov't Borrowing

3) Monetization

And the primary method Japan's gov't used was #2 above.  Then again, they also had a 'lost decade' and more years of stagnant growth (according to government numbers).  

Do you think American citizens can finance the massive expansion in government spending here?

=0

There are extreme qualitative differences between Japan's economy then and America's now.  A more apt comparison would be what happened in Argentina, where they didn't seem to have any kind of liquidity trap.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 10
Points 230

Harry Felker:

wilderness:
I also noticed that graph states it's about 15 cents, yet, Ron P. and others say it's about .03 or .04 cents.  But as I mentioned you probably right the numbers are more like .0001 or something by now.

Last I checked, it was $.04, that was pre Bush stimulus....

If we use gold prices without the congressional fixes (should be $2000+ by now) we are less than a penny...

When the chickens come to roost, $.0001 will be generous....

Pardon my ignorance, but I have never heard of these fixes before. Could you elaborate?

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 2 of 2 (28 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS

Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528

Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119

contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises

Mises.org sitemap