John Maynard Keynes is responsible for all that is about to happen to the world

[Robert Paulson]

his bullshit theories about money printing and deficit spending give governments the academic justification they need to manipulate the money markets.
not only are his ideas responsible for all the economic misery the west is having for the last 40 years but he has infected Japan and China too,
there is not a single country today that is not on the disaster recipe of paper money/central bank manipulated interest rates.

the world is collectively heading towards financial suicide as the west continues to cannibalize the capital it has accumulated during its 170 years of more or less real money capitalism and free markets.
may the odds be at your favor for what is about to unfold in the coming years...

[1713997050]

1713997050

[zyzzbrah]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

[Robert Paulson]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

automatization of labor has been happening since the industrial revolution and has brought our western standard of living to unmatched historic levels.

whats happening now is squarely the fault of keynseian malinvestments and the corruption of the monetary system.

it was free market capitalism that propelled the west into prosperity and socialism that burried china and russia.

now the socialistic cancer has infected the west in a disguise of keynsian capitalism.

[NotLambchop]

his bullshit theories about money printing and deficit spending give governments the academic justification they need to manipulate the money markets...

Stop thinking, Robert Paulson.  It serves no purpose and gives your flesh a sour aftertaste.



  ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords.

[TonyT]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

automatization of labor has been happening since the industrial revolution and has brought our western standard of living to unmatched historic levels.

whats happening now is squarely the fault of keynseian malinvestments and the corruption of the monetary system.

it was free market capitalism that propelled the west into prosperity and socialism that burried china and russia.

now the socialistic cancer has infected the west in a disguise of keynsian capitalism.

You Austrians think too much.  In fact, J.M. Keynes (much as I hate him) was a genius.  He correctly saw several things. First, if you are an Austrian, he foresaw AD (Aggregate Demand) is a viable concept (feel free to disagree, but nearly nobody who is not an Austrian agrees with you).  Second, he saw that Say's Law does not work (ditto).  Third, he saw that in the economy of the 1930s (and true even today), where unions existed and monopoly power exists, that wages and prices are "sticky", hence, with most people, you can fool them by "printing more money" (they confuse nominal prices with real prices, due to sticky wages and prices).

For all of the above Keynes deserves praise.  That said, I am a gold bug and hard money advocate and I hate what he's done to modern economies (perpetual debts, savers are shafted in favor of debtors, and currency is debased every year).  But he's still a genius, much more than say Murray Rothbard of the Austrian school.

[Robert Paulson]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

automatization of labor has been happening since the industrial revolution and has brought our western standard of living to unmatched historic levels.

whats happening now is squarely the fault of keynseian malinvestments and the corruption of the monetary system.

it was free market capitalism that propelled the west into prosperity and socialism that burried china and russia.

now the socialistic cancer has infected the west in a disguise of keynsian capitalism.

You Austrians think too much.  In fact, J.M. Keynes (much as I hate him) was a genius.  He correctly saw several things. First, if you are an Austrian, he foresaw AD (Aggregate Demand) is a viable concept (feel free to disagree, but nearly nobody who is not an Austrian agrees with you).  Second, he saw that Say's Law does not work (ditto).  Third, he saw that in the economy of the 1930s (and true even today), where unions existed and monopoly power exists, that wages and prices are "sticky", hence, with most people, you can fool them by "printing more money" (they confuse nominal prices with real prices, due to sticky wages and prices).

For all of the above Keynes deserves praise.  That said, I am a gold bug and hard money advocate and I hate what he's done to modern economies (perpetual debts, savers are shafted in favor of debtors, and currency is debased every year).  But he's still a genius, much more than say Murray Rothbard of the Austrian school.

instead of advocating the abolishment of the laws that give the union workers the power to violate their contract without being fired Keynes decided that redistributing wealth by printing money is a good idea, we are suffering from those ideas to this day.

just like Karl Marx is responsible for all the misery the Russian and Chinese had to endure for almost a 100 years the west is about to taste the same medicine of institutional malinvestments.
at least until the people demand free markets and honest money again, much like their forefathers did.

[twiifm]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

automatization of labor has been happening since the industrial revolution and has brought our western standard of living to unmatched historic levels.

whats happening now is squarely the fault of keynseian malinvestments and the corruption of the monetary system.

it was free market capitalism that propelled the west into prosperity and socialism that burried china and russia.

now the socialistic cancer has infected the west in a disguise of keynsian capitalism.

You Austrians think too much.  In fact, J.M. Keynes (much as I hate him) was a genius.  He correctly saw several things. First, if you are an Austrian, he foresaw AD (Aggregate Demand) is a viable concept (feel free to disagree, but nearly nobody who is not an Austrian agrees with you).  Second, he saw that Say's Law does not work (ditto).  Third, he saw that in the economy of the 1930s (and true even today), where unions existed and monopoly power exists, that wages and prices are "sticky", hence, with most people, you can fool them by "printing more money" (they confuse nominal prices with real prices, due to sticky wages and prices).

For all of the above Keynes deserves praise.  That said, I am a gold bug and hard money advocate and I hate what he's done to modern economies (perpetual debts, savers are shafted in favor of debtors, and currency is debased every year).  But he's still a genius, much more than say Murray Rothbard of the Austrian school.

instead of advocating the abolishment of the laws that give the union workers the power to violate their contract without being fired Keynes decided that redistributing wealth by printing money is a good idea, we are suffering from those ideas to this day.

just like Karl Marx is responsible for all the misery the Russian and Chinese had to endure for almost a 100 years the west is about to taste the same medicine of institutional malinvestments.
at least until the people demand free markets and honest money again, much like their forefathers did.

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

[EternalWingsofGod]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Automation is a serious factor in the income inequality gap
Structural unemployment of the labour market meaning a signifcant rise in wages for skilled labour due to insufficient supply and a signifcant fall in wages for unskilled labour due to increasing supply as a factor of technological change is a valid critique of the system.

That said Hayek and others have mentioned ways around that just look at Foster and Catchings
http://mises.org/daily/2804

[RonPaulBTC]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

Automation is a serious factor in the income inequality gap
Structural unemployment of the labour market meaning a signifcant rise in wages for skilled labour due to insufficient supply and a signifcant fall in wages for unskilled labour due to increasing supply as a factor of technological change is a valid critique of the system.

That said Hayek and others have mentioned ways around that just look at Foster and Catchings
http://mises.org/daily/2804

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYqBxEAtXZA

China is already printing houses. System is doomed, thing is they are probably to dumb to even realize.

[Robert Paulson]

You are delusional as hell if you think any other policies could save capitalism anyway. We are headed towards structural unemployment due automatization of  labour, and this is unstopable. You should study a bit more before being this simplistic. "Its just Keynes..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

automatization of labor has been happening since the industrial revolution and has brought our western standard of living to unmatched historic levels.

whats happening now is squarely the fault of keynseian malinvestments and the corruption of the monetary system.

it was free market capitalism that propelled the west into prosperity and socialism that burried china and russia.

now the socialistic cancer has infected the west in a disguise of keynsian capitalism.

You Austrians think too much.  In fact, J.M. Keynes (much as I hate him) was a genius.  He correctly saw several things. First, if you are an Austrian, he foresaw AD (Aggregate Demand) is a viable concept (feel free to disagree, but nearly nobody who is not an Austrian agrees with you).  Second, he saw that Say's Law does not work (ditto).  Third, he saw that in the economy of the 1930s (and true even today), where unions existed and monopoly power exists, that wages and prices are "sticky", hence, with most people, you can fool them by "printing more money" (they confuse nominal prices with real prices, due to sticky wages and prices).

For all of the above Keynes deserves praise.  That said, I am a gold bug and hard money advocate and I hate what he's done to modern economies (perpetual debts, savers are shafted in favor of debtors, and currency is debased every year).  But he's still a genius, much more than say Murray Rothbard of the Austrian school.

instead of advocating the abolishment of the laws that give the union workers the power to violate their contract without being fired Keynes decided that redistributing wealth by printing money is a good idea, we are suffering from those ideas to this day.

just like Karl Marx is responsible for all the misery the Russian and Chinese had to endure for almost a 100 years the west is about to taste the same medicine of institutional malinvestments.
at least until the people demand free markets and honest money again, much like their forefathers did.

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

In "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money", Keynes advocates lowering the rate of interest, below the "marginal efficiency of capital."
this means banks have to print money or they will run out of it because they are effectively enforcing a price control on money.

[practicaldreamer]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

[Robert Paulson]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

[Honeypot]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

[NotLambchop]

...
This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

Sure.  Who do you think Robert Paulson works for?

[Robert Paulson]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

there is nothing over simplistic about it, its simply simple.
the interest rate is the price of money, if you set it artificially low demand will outstrip supply and you will run out of money to loan.
the only way this can be sustained is if the banks are allowed to print more and more money.
hence whether Keynes understood this or not he advocated the printing of money.

[practicaldreamer]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

there is nothing over simplistic about it, its simply simple.
the interest rate is the price of money, if you set it artificially low demand will outstrip supply and you will run out of money to loan.
the only way this can be sustained is if the banks are allowed to print more and more money.
hence whether Keynes understood this or not he advocated the printing of money.

What if you were in recession and the price of money was reduced because at its previous price there wasn't enough demand ?

[Robert Paulson]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money. 

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

there is nothing over simplistic about it, its simply simple.
the interest rate is the price of money, if you set it artificially low demand will outstrip supply and you will run out of money to loan.
the only way this can be sustained is if the banks are allowed to print more and more money.
hence whether Keynes understood this or not he advocated the printing of money.

What if you were in recession and the price of money was reduced because at its previous price there wasn't enough demand ?

what about it? if the free market reduces it then its fine as it matches the demand and there is no need to print money.
when a central bankster decides it needs to be lower because he said so, he has to start printing money because demand outstrips supply the second he starts manipulating interest rates down.

[practicaldreamer]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money.  

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

there is nothing over simplistic about it, its simply simple.
the interest rate is the price of money, if you set it artificially low demand will outstrip supply and you will run out of money to loan.
the only way this can be sustained is if the banks are allowed to print more and more money.
hence whether Keynes understood this or not he advocated the printing of money.

What if you were in recession and the price of money was reduced because at its previous price there wasn't enough demand ?

what about it? if the free market reduces it then its fine as it matches the demand and there is no need to print money.
when a central bankster decides it needs to be lower because he said so, he has to start printing money because demand outstrips supply the second he starts manipulating interest rates down.

That doesn't follow - interest rates can be brought lower without printing more money - it just means money won't be quite as cheap as it would be if they had also increased its supply.

[Robert Paulson]

Keynes is not about printing money.  Hes all about stimulus.

Friedman is about printing money.  

Dude learn this 101 level stuff before you post

+1

Also, there is a bit of a difference in Government borrowing (in order to stimulate demand and create employment through public sector investment in for eg. infrastructure) and TBTF commercial banks operating in a deregulated market creating debt and cheap money to the masses.

These kind of arguments, whereby unemployment is caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated/"liberalised" labour market) and where credit crunches are also caused by regulation (in what to all intents and purposes is a deregulated (ineffectual regulation) banking sector) - well, it just doesn't ring true.

   Its like the man who crashes his car blaming it on the mandatory road tax he has to pay - and not the bottle of vodka he downed before setting off on his journey.

Keynes advocates artificially lowering interest rates, there is no way to do this without having the banks print more money.

This kind of overly simplistic attitude does more to hurt 'the cause' then any 'bankster' can dream of doing.

there is nothing over simplistic about it, its simply simple.
the interest rate is the price of money, if you set it artificially low demand will outstrip supply and you will run out of money to loan.
the only way this can be sustained is if the banks are allowed to print more and more money.
hence whether Keynes understood this or not he advocated the printing of money.

What if you were in recession and the price of money was reduced because at its previous price there wasn't enough demand ?

what about it? if the free market reduces it then its fine as it matches the demand and there is no need to print money.
when a central bankster decides it needs to be lower because he said so, he has to start printing money because demand outstrips supply the second he starts manipulating interest rates down.

That doesn't follow - interest rates can be brought lower without printing more money - it just means money won't be quite as cheap as it would be if they had also increased its supply.

what you're saying makes no sense.
the interest rate IS the price of money.
when the banksters lower the interest rate below what the free market would dictate they have to increase the supply or they will run out of money to loan.

[practicaldreamer]

Lower interest rates increases the money supply by making it more attractive to lend/borrow and spend money. Money that was being saved now becomes money that is being spent. This is how the money supply is increased - not necessarily through QE.
    QE may be deemed necessary (in exceptional circumstances) where lower interest rates in themselves are not deemed sufficient a measure at having stimulated demand within the economy.

   When interest rates rise does the central banker cut up/burn or otherwise destroy $ bills ?