Posted on 07/03/2010 6:43:19 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
Most of the profs speak English as a second language, poorly. One guy would write formulas on the board with his right hand while following with an eraser in his left.
Bears repeating.
You are absolutely correct. In the 19th and early 20th it was possible for honorable and intelligent people to deceive themselves into believing they could "manage" the economy and make the world a better place.
The economy has since become orders of magnitude more complex and faster moving. Only a fool, an aspiring tyrant or someone intentionally deceiving himself could believe the same today.
It's like controlling the weather (or the climate). It's not just that we'd likely screw it up, it's that we don't have a clue how to go about doing it. If we would admit to ourselves that we don't have a clue, we just might possibly find one. Since we won't, we won't.
Define "fails."
My point is that calling a particular policy "Keynesian" does not mean it is necessarily destined for failure.
And it is often possible to argue that even with a "failed" policy things might have been even worse without it.
Eh? The one concept directly implies the other.
Also bears repeating.
Rxcellent book.
One thing about economists... most are not business people and they do not understand business. Most would not be an economist if they knew how to make money in the business world. A few are truly sharp scientists but very few. Most “economists” quoted my the state run media are acaDemons... they know the least of all.
LLS
—took me a while to paste/format it for printing/reading; now for my coffee....
I find your pontificating about my pontificating about the author's pontificating something to pontificate about.
That’s because they never read Hazlitt’s classic.
Go here for help:
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Henry-Hazlitt/dp/B001G8NW6Y/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278167272&sr=8-2
Time for a a beer, another pressing problem solved.
Thanks for the link. Sounds like a good companion to Schiff’s book.
I just have the impression that neither of you bothered to read the essay.
History (and intellect) has ALWAYS shown Keynes as a failed economist and the politicians that follow his failed philosophy.
Good grief! All he had to say was, "Economics follows Chaos Theory and therefore can't be explained" instead of four pages of Thesaurus use.
He (or she?) has to spend a good deal of time heading-off the attacks you see above—”ivory tower intellectual,” “elitist,” and so forth.
>>made deliberately hard by people in the trade
Pay no attention to the little men behind the curtain.
Ivory Tower A$$Hats like Athreya like to prop up the facade that the Proletariat needs a Vanguard Elite to “understand” (or not?) that fraud and blowing a derivative bubble by securitizing A$$Paper is bad.
Well, most of us simple folks (with common sense) don’t need a “Kartik Athreya” to understand the double entendre meaning of ESAD - one being a directive commonly uttered toward pompous twits like Athreya - the other meaning simply that if you do, you will.
Eat A$$Paper and Die, Athreya - if you do, you will. PLEASE DO!
Great overview of Keynes, his core belief of Socialism and what his goals were...
John Maynard Keynes and Economic Fascism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnUUMs9WIC0
You’re gonna’ have to ice that knee, it jerked so badly.
Eat A$$Paper and Die, little rude twit.
Your example sounds like accounting, not economics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.