|
|
|
|
|
by jerf
5601 days ago
|
|
"Perhaps the government should act as a countercyclical balance to the private sector?" Perhaps it should. The question is academic in all the bad senses, because while people love to cite Keynesian theories about how government should behave as if it's some sort of proved theory that admits no debate (itself a false statement, it was considered essentially disproved until suddenly it told the government what it wanted to hear and got itself revived; I fully expect it to be considered disproved again until it ends up convenient again), they fail to look out in the world and notice just how thoroughly our government is not acting Keynesian anyhow. The whole Keynesian multiplier argument falls apart if the government appropriates a dollar and then generates $0.30 of wealth with it, instead of >$1.00. I'm well aware of the Keynesian argument. What I've noticed is that even by Keynesianism, if the goverment proves incapable of generating a multiplier Keynesianism itself says the government should spend less. Having a pretty economic theory does not remove your responsibility to look out into the world and see if it actually describes reality. In reality, what the government is doing is not Keynesian stimulus.... it's just spending money. Austerity countries are taking their hit now. Non-austerity countries are taking it later, and will take it bigger as a result. |
|