I’m understandably fond of my video exposing the flaws of Keynesian stimulus theory, but I think my former intern has a great contribution to the debate with this new 5-minute mini-documentary.
You may recognize Hiwa. She narrated a very popular video earlier this year on the nightmare of income-tax complexity.
Your intern is hot, good work.
[...] at International Liberty, Dan Mitchell share some videos on why Keynesian economics don’t [...]
[...] Via International Liberty [...]
To Walenty Lisek:
Really? That’s the only intelligent comment you can make in response to this video – that the intern is hot? She probably spent a lot of time and effort to make this video informative, and men like you pay no attention to that aspect of the video. Although I wholeheartedly disagree with her rationale, as a woman I am utterly disgusted by your comment.
Pitiful.
[...] say the same thing about Republicans. Bernanke has made clear that he either believes in the perpetual-motion machine of Keynesianism, or he’s willing to endorse Keynesian policies to curry favor with the White House. [...]
I just saw this, linked from your other comment. For the benefit of anyone who googles this in the future, I thought I’d point out why it’s wrong.
It assumes that government borrowing “comes from somewhere” – that it somehow either reduces money available for private investment or “puts us in hock to China”.
This is based on an flawed understanding of how the modern monetary system operates. A modern currency issuing government in a floating exchange regime does not, in fact, “borrow” in any real sense. It creates money by spending it, destroys it by taxing it, and issues “debt” only as a way to support a non-zero interest rate. (Note: those are the operational realities, not necessarily how the people in charge understand what they are doing.) For a good introduction to some of these operational realities, go here: http://pragcap.com/resources/understanding-modern-monetary-system.
I agree that ultimately, the only way to increase national wealth is to increase investment. But the number one factor in business investment decisions is not concerns about taxes or regulation or what have you: it’s whether or not they think they will be able to sell more! Increasing the amount of money in people’s hands (whether by increasing govt spending or by decreasing taxes) will increase theri effective demand and then lead to more investment. Why is that so hard for you AEI types to grasp?
[...] say the same thing about Republicans. Bernanke has made clear that he either believes in the perpetual-motion machine of Keynesianism, or he’s willing to endorse Keynesian policies to curry favor with the White House. Republicans [...]
[...] support for Keynesian economics. I’ve addressed that issue here, here, here, here, and here, so I don’t feel any great need to rehash all those arguments. I’ll just ask why the [...]
[...] support for Keynesian economics. I’ve addressed that issue here, here, here, here, and here, so I don’t feel any great need to rehash all those arguments. I’ll just ask why the [...]
[...] support for Keynesian economics. I’ve addressed that issue here, here, here, here, and here, so I don’t feel any great need to rehash all those arguments. I’ll just ask why the [...]
[...] unwavering support for Keynesian economics. I've addressed that issue here, here, here, here, and here, so I don't feel any great need to rehash all those arguments. I'll just ask why the policy still [...]
[...] people to spend more money. But that’s the Keynesian approach, and it fails to realize that economic growth is when people earn more money. In other words, we need to produce before we [...]
Concerned liberal….your obvious envy of her hottess is showing….;-)