"`Love is in my blood', you honky cat!" 
Don't get any on you .... 
Posted on 05/04/2013 7:07:00 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
A Harvard professor took to the podium at a finance conference Friday and called major influencer of modern economics John Maynard Keynes wrong about his philosophies because he was gay and childless.
During a question and answer session in Carlsbad, California, well-known historian Niall Ferguson was asked how he felt about the theories of English economist John Maynard Keynes versus those of Edmund Burke.
What the prominent Obama critic said in response hushed the crowd of over 500.
According to Tom Kostigen, editor-at-large of Financial Advisor magazine, Ferguson made it clear that he believed Keynes was uninterested in the what was good for society, basically because of his sexual orientation.
‘Ferguson asked the audience how many children Keynes had,’ wrote Kostigen in Financial Advisor. ‘He explained that Keynes had none because he was a homosexual and was married to a ballerina, with whom he likely talked of "poetry" rather than procreated.’
Kostigen said many of the audience members took offense at the remark, but that Ferguson continued.
‘Ferguson, author of The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die,' wrote Kostigen, ‘says it's only logical that Keynes would take this selfish worldview because he was an "effete" member of society.’
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
However, that part they forgot to read was when revenues started coming in, you are supposed to pay down the debt so that you had the ability to be stimulative again, when the cycle changed.
Seems like part I is fun. Part II is not. So our government just blew it off.
That's very true. I too will not defend JMK, but most people get him wrong on that score. His deficit spending in recession proposition assumed also that in years of economic boom... Surpluses would be "banked" for the next recession. Something modern Keynesians have utterly ignored.
It’s a fairly safe bet that someone who doesn’t have kids couldn’t care less what their country will look like after they’re dead. It simply means nothing.
And that’s goes a VERY LONG WAY in explaining the suicidal policies of Europe and the US when it comes to immigration. Basically the people making the decisions (generally) don’t have kids (for whatever reason) and thus they spend money like there’s no tomorrow - because for them, there really isn’t, once they’re gone.
Having kids should almost be a requirement for high political office.
Well said. The homosexual is profoundly pessimistic because he has nothing invested in the future. Do they ever start foundations? I wonder.
That and they flatly refuse to believe that the abortion supporting, gay marriage backing gun control and immigration freak next door or in their family is really ‘a bad person’.
They are.
There is something to be said for a “royal family” attitude: “ If my country does poorly, my family is held responsible, perhaps even killed or imprisoned by rebellion. If my family does well for my country and its future, my country will honor my children.”
Don’t put words in my mouth. I said the single heterosexual people I know don’t care At All about the debt & deficit or the impact of both on future generations. That is a true statement. If you object, your issue is with these people, not with me.
We’re all still waiting for the economic boom from Obama’s “stimulus.” What, did Obama not spend enough?
Ferguson is way too smart to draw such simplistic conclusions. That’s why he apologized-—he embarrased himself/ He is probably increasingly frustrated by the fact that this cipher Obama is still President and all his policies seem to refer back to Keynes in some way in the quest for some philosophical cache. You can’t blame him.
He’s got a point, but there is no real causality, even though I myself have noticed the extreme predictability of people with no children and their worldview. There’s a dimension missing, definitely.
Agree 100% Having children changed my whole worldview. I was just telling my neighbor a shark story that happened a few years ago. I was at the beach with my kids and a group of friends and their kids. One of the moms in our group jumped up and ran toward the shore. I followed and saw a huge black shape moving slowly along the shore line about 25 ft out and stopping in front of the kids. The kids were about 35 feet out bobbing up and down in a group. We could not make out what the shape was so I whistled to the kids to stay put so they would not swim toward it. In that moment I prepared myself that if it was a shark I was going in. I am scared to death of sharks but there was no way my child or any other child would be the bait. By that time all the mothers were at the shore line and I think we would have had to fight over who was going to fight the shark LOL!! Turns out it was a huge manatee cruising down the shore but it illustrates what parents would do for their kids.
A homosexual plays no part in CREATING the next generation, so like I said in a post on this thread, their worldview should be expected to be, uhhhh, “incomplete” at best.
That is just the way it is, and that’s why it’s more surprising to find homosexuals among Conservatives than among the “apres moi le deluge” Liberal types.
Republicans in power are just as opportunistic and selective in the way that they invoke debt and deficit as the current administration. It has everything to do with power and reelection and almost nothing to do with political, never mind sexual, orientation or other lifestyle preferences.
Although, I am male, and I might have yelled out to the kids that they were close enough to the same that one of them was a spare (mine were 14 months apart). But I'm just that way.
I tend to have "Goes where angels fear to tread" syndrome. I've waded into more dogfights and serious problems than any completely rational person would.
I blame that on having kids. And being human.
It has made me run a tighter OODA loop.
/johnny
A greater stake does not help rational behavior, although it can at times hurt it.
I am not promoting homosexuality but until someone can point out a relationship between IQ and sexuality, this is irrelevant to making superior economic theory.
Keynes may have been wrong but not because of his sexuality. The other guy sounds a little bit off, even if his economics are sound.
What in the world? LOL.
Forget the next generation...it is more like a few years until the next wave of economic misery hits when the only demographic likely to escape our world of pain will be the very wealthy. That gays are somehow more invulnerable to losing everything they have as opposed to heterosexual singles and single parents is too absurd for comment.
"`Love is in my blood', you honky cat!" Don't get any on you ....
Whenever I see lips and a jaw like that (check out former Governor McGreevy), I really get the creeps...
A professor who dares challenge the political correctness thought police, especially when it comes to the turd poker culture, better watch his back at a toilet like Harvard. I think this guy is in for a real sh**storm.
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.