ya... we really would be better of if we went with hayek...
ya... we really would be better of if we went with hayek...


| ssj12 said: ya... we really would be better of if we went with hayek... |
Probably anyway.
It's what is ironic about the "In the long run we're all dead" arguement.
It was right... in that... in he's dead, and so was everyone else... it wasn't until afterwords stagflation happened... and I mean... in the long run... we might be able to outrun the debt and burden it on all your kids. (I'm not having any.)
Keynes is a lot like Marx... in that... I wonder if he were still alive he were a Keynsian. Like if Marx was alive, there is a good chance he wouldn't be a communist.
Just like how things have improved DRASTICALLY from the time of Marx without the "rise of the proletariat"... the onset of Stagflation likely would of likely struck Keynes pretty hard.
It's amusing... and this is true for hayek as well... how a great person's beliefs change drastically through their lives... but then crystalize and almsot don't change at all after their deaths among their followers. Granted Keynes and Hayak do have economists who are in their footsteps, but the changes have been fairly mild.

Kasz216 said:
|
Hmmm... one of my friends (he's a Keynesian.. don't ask), said that he found it biased in that they portrayed Keynes to be much more smug/a jerk in the videos... making the watchers lean towards Hayek in that way.
It is quite clear, if you watch the interview with the creators and The Economist, that the creators are certainly Classical economists, actually stating that they don't understand why Keynsian economics are still around, after the 70s stagflation. I agree with them, I just think it shows that their content isn't going to be wholly unbiased.
Then again... is it possible to be unbiased about something that makes more sense objectively? It's like the BBC trying to produce an unbiased report on the Holocaust, or something.
SamuelRSmith said:
It is quite clear, if you watch the interview with the creators and The Economist, that the creators are certainly Classical economists, actually stating that they don't understand why Keynsian economics are still around, after the 70s stagflation. I agree with them, I just think it shows that their content isn't going to be wholly unbiased. Then again... is it possible to be unbiased about something that makes more sense objectively? It's like the BBC trying to produce an unbiased report on the Holocaust, or something. |
Oh, I agree with them too... I was just saying.
I mean, we've tried Kensyism for every downturn and have yet to hit a point where we've gotten out. Successivly. Out of shrinking? Yes, but not where we were...
and the it's always been followed by more shrinking.
Then you have Stagflation, which a theory of has just been tagged on to the big one, pretending that it doesn't more or less make the whole theory pointless.
