View Poll Results: Do you support Keynesian economics?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    12 42.86%
  • No

    13 46.43%
  • Don't Know

    2 7.14%
  • Don't Care

    1 3.57%
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 74

Thread: Do you support Keynesian economics?

  1. #41
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    because they think it increases aggregate demand. demand for them is the precursor position. we support similar positions with very different assumptions about supply and production v demand - and in particular they want deficit-funded tax decreases (which I will agree are much better than deficit-funded spending increases); whereas I would say you need to slash both if you want to optimize your result. I would argue that you don't cut taxes on productive behavior in order to "increase demand", you do it to "increase productive behavior".
    yeah okay i agree that's where we split lol.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  2. #42
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    sort of - and I have some quibbles with how they approach demand as well. here, however, I am specifically concerned with the notion that government can somehow magically increase "aggregate demand" and boost the economy by taking money from more productive uses and putting it to less productive uses.
    If the uses were so productive in late 2008, early 2009, then why were businesses failing? We witnessed a slew of the largest bankruptcies in history and here you stand making an arbitrary comment about productive uses.

    and see that's where we split.
    Tax cuts to stimulate demand are Keynesian; if you support such policies then you are in fact supporting Keynesianism.
    Last edited by Kushinator; 06-05-11 at 12:46 PM.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  3. #43
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    If the uses were so productive in late 2008, early 2009, then why were businesses failing? We witnessed a slew of the largest bankruptcies in history and here you stand making an arbitrary comment about productive uses.



    Tax cuts to stimulate demand are Keynesian; if you support such policies then you are in fact supporting Keynesianism.
    GB - I think our economic views are pretty similar, but for what it's worth I don't buy the logic in this statement. People support tax cuts for different reasons. Supporting tax cuts doesn't make one a Keynesian, it depends on why.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  4. #44
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    see post # 32
    The post where you took Makniw's opinion as your own? I could post a Krugman or Stiglitz opinion piece; but that is hardly credible macro literature.

    last I checked Europe isn't slashing tax rates.
    Europe cannot slash tax rates because they would be instantly downgraded by the major credit agencies thereby pushing them to default (such downgrades reallocate collateral requirements which turns the scale considerably).

    Canada is, however - specifically they're cutting their corporate tax rate. Wonder how Canada is doing.
    Canada has been experiencing positive GDP growth for some time, and does not have the massive amount of consumer and government debt hanging over their heads. So yes, they can slash tax rates where as we cannot.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #45
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    GB - I think our economic views are pretty similar, but for what it's worth I don't buy the logic in this statement. People support tax cuts for different reasons. Supporting tax cuts doesn't make one a Keynesian, it depends on why.
    If you are supporting Bush style tax cuts to improve the economy, that's Keynesian theory at it's purest. If you are supporting tax cuts to gain political favor, well.... that is something else in it's entirety.

    And for the record, i do not support one school of economic thought although i pay close attention to New Keynesians (which are essentially the same as neo-classical supporters) and institutionalism.
    Last edited by Kushinator; 06-05-11 at 12:56 PM.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #46
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    GB - I think our economic views are pretty similar, but for what it's worth I don't buy the logic in this statement. People support tax cuts for different reasons. Supporting tax cuts doesn't make one a Keynesian, it depends on why.
    Tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts for the government quite often have the same stimulative effect as when a government increases spending.

    It is the spending over and above what normal incomes would support that is stimulative. Whether the money for the extra savings come from savings or from debt, it is stimulative, it doesnt matter if it is the government or private individuals doing the spending.

    As for which is more effective of course is determined by what is done with the extra money put into the economy. Spent on infrustructure, it can provide both a short term and a long term boost to the economy, spent on foreign non durable goods, it will have less of an effect on that countries economy, put into a savings account or used to pay down debt, it will have no effect on the short term economic activity
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  7. #47
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    put into a savings account or used to pay down debt, it will have no effect on the short term economic activity
    Some always fail to understand this part.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #48
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts for the government quite often have the same stimulative effect as when a government increases spending.

    It is the spending over and above what normal incomes would support that is stimulative. Whether the money for the extra savings come from savings or from debt, it is stimulative, it doesnt matter if it is the government or private individuals doing the spending.

    As for which is more effective of course is determined by what is done with the extra money put into the economy. Spent on infrustructure, it can provide both a short term and a long term boost to the economy, spent on foreign non durable goods, it will have less of an effect on that countries economy, put into a savings account or used to pay down debt, it will have no effect on the short term economic activity
    100% agree.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  9. #49
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,125

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    The post where you took Makniw's opinion as your own?
    no, where I linked to him citing two pieces of literature that give the lie to your claim.

    Europe cannot slash tax rates because they would be instantly downgraded by the major credit agencies thereby pushing them to default (such downgrades reallocate collateral requirements which turns the scale considerably).
    well that's on the credit agencies then. Static Scoring will be the doom of us yet .

    Canada has been experiencing positive GDP growth for some time, and does not have the massive amount of consumer and government debt hanging over their heads. So yes, they can slash tax rates where as we cannot.
    canada collects a larger percentage of her revenue from corporate taxes than we do, with a tax rate that is less than half of ours.

    again, revenue is not as much a function of rates as it is a function of growth and GDP.

  10. #50
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,125

    Re: Do you support Keynesian economics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts for the government quite often have the same stimulative effect as when a government increases spending.
    no, they have a greater effect, because it matters who is doing the spending. economic decisions made by producers and consumers looking for the best return/product for the lowest price tend to make better economic decisions than those that are made by congresscritters seeking reelection.

    It is the spending over and above what normal incomes would support that is stimulative. Whether the money for the extra savings come from savings or from debt, it is stimulative, it doesnt matter if it is the government or private individuals doing the spending
    okay. when government spends money that it gets through debt - where did that money come from?

    As for which is more effective of course is determined by what is done with the extra money put into the economy. Spent on infrustructure, it can provide both a short term and a long term boost to the economy, spent on foreign non durable goods, it will have less of an effect on that countries economy, put into a savings account or used to pay down debt, it will have no effect on the short term economic activity
    and again, Goldenboy's literature, indicates that:

    ....Indebtedness also matters: when the outstanding debt of the central government exceeds 60 percent of GDP, the fiscal multiplier is not statistically different from zero on impact and it is negative in the long run. Thus, the 60-percent-of-GDP threshold is a critical value above which fiscal stimulus may have a negative, rather than a positive impact on output....

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •