PDA

View Full Version : Do We Need More of Keynes Now?



chux03
1st November 2008, 23:32
http://mises.org/story/3169

from the above mentioned article:

"From this we can conclude that since government is not a wealth generator it therefore cannot grow the economy. Contrary to popular belief, the more government spends, the worse it is for the health of the economy and thus for economic growth.

Rescue packages aimed at saving the economies of the world are just laying the foundation for more misery in the months ahead. Many commentators and economic experts who advocate strong government stimulus measures never bother to ask how those measures are going to be funded and by funding we mean real stuff: where are all the bread and the potatoes going to come from?

It doesn't occur to the Keynesian sympathizers that it is the fiscal and monetary policies of the past several decades that have given rise to nonproductive consumption. The outcome of all this is the vast amount of bubble activities. How can more of the same Keynesian policies policies that have inflicted massive damage on wealth producers revive the economy?

What is now required is not more Keynesian policies but rather allowing wealth producers to move fast and start generating real wealth. What is required is plenty of productive consumption. More government spending and the massive pushing of money by central banks only strengthens nonproductive consumption, thereby delaying prospects for a meaningful economic recovery."

by Frank Shostak

chux03
1st November 2008, 23:37
"....the more government spends, the worse it is for the health of the economy and thus for economic growth."



IF....that's the case, we really DO have some problems in this country, because our government's middle name is SPEND.

In fact, that's about the only thing that I can think of that our government does rather well.

We're phucked and most don't even realize it yet....

Trvlr45
2nd November 2008, 01:04
You are correct Chux and as I drive around the country I still see everyone just having a ball. Although there are many that do know what is happening as well but I think they are in the minority.

Gino
2nd November 2008, 02:32
Non-productive consumption.

Well the role of government, amongst other things, should include the development of the environment and infrastructure in which society exists. If they created new money to enhance that environment, then productive capacity would increase and that new money would not be deployed into non-productive investments. Instead, the government borrows money, claims it cannot afford to maintain the societal environment or enhance its capacity and leaves the population impoverished or enslaved to creditors. I think that’s been the thrust of FedFixNix’s argument these last few months and it makes sense to me.

Not quoting the bible, but I liken these bankers and their politicians to the biblical Pharisees spoken of by Jesus:


Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves."

Jesus said, "Woe to the pharisees, for they are like a dog sleeping in the manger of oxen, for neither does he eat nor does he let the oxen eat."
- Gospel of Thomas (http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html)

Due to their arrogance, power, ignorance and timidity to move beyond the norms, they are screwing everyone and everything in maintaining the status quo. For evidence of this, you need look no further than the obscene use of bailout money to pay banker bonuses. That would have to be the greatest example of unproductive consumption on the face of the planet by these current day Pharisees.

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 05:06
Quote:
Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves."

Jesus said, "Woe to the pharisees, for they are like a dog sleeping in the manger of oxen, for neither does he eat nor does he let the oxen eat."


Jesus came out against the Pharisees becuase they were teaching the Babylonian Talmud which is basically a guidebook for masters controlling slaves.

Today, YOU are the slave according to the NWO , the Babylonian Talmud and international law.

research24
2nd November 2008, 08:20
My kingdom is not of this world . . .

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 14:03
My kingdom is not of this world . . .

Hmmm. In my opinion that's the same kind of hyperbole and self rightious justifification used by cowards and pharisees. Is that the excuse you are going to give your grandchildren for sitting on your butt and doing nothing?

Ever hear of The War of the Lamb? Unless you get up off your butt and do something righteous to protect yourself and future generations, you, your children and your grandchildren are going to become the sacrificial lambs. Martyrs don't win wars. They just become footnotes in the pages of the history books. You don't fight the war of the Lamb with guns. You are going to have to use the brains and spirit the Good Lord gave you in this war. We could use a few miracles too.

All good warriors for the Lamb are going to "the kingdom" when we die. In the meantime, it looks to me like we, our children and our grandchildren are stuck right here on earth.

MikeJ
2nd November 2008, 14:21
We need to get rid of the Keynesian system, plain and simple. Screw the British and develop the American system as it was proposed by Alexander Hamilton.

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 15:49
Screw the British

That's pretty much what my ancestors said when they boarded the ship that followed the Mayflower in order to come to America. Truly, the Rothschild banking dynasty who invented the Keynesian monetary system to enslave us all are demons from hell.

"The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy." - Abe Lincoln, 1864

FedFixNix
2nd November 2008, 17:36
First, Keynes was just another of a long line of economic modifications of the ancient banking practices that culminated in Adam Smith and the Bank of England model of a private central banking system. Being the largest part of the current problem, neither Keynesian economics nor private central banking can ever be a part of a workable solution.

Keynes is as irrelevant to a solution as is Von Mises, or Menger, founders of the Austrian School. This article simply diverts attention from the real problem by offering illusory choices. Of course the bailouts are massive frauds. Rewarding criminals for their crimes is despicable, no matter how much lipstick you put on that pig.

"From this we can conclude that since government is not a wealth generator it therefore cannot grow the economy."

Government may or may not be a wealth generator, depending on how it is structured, and the extent it becomes engaged in productive activities. However, by definition, government is a "production facilitator" that augments society's ability to generate wealth. Someone, generally government, has to build roads and bridges to move commerce and facilitate trade, etc. Government armies or navies must often protect trade routes and shipping lanes from predation. Commerce requires law and order that is generally provided by governments. Etc.

Gino made this point as well:

"Well the role of government, amongst other things, should include the development of the environment and infrastructure in which society exists."

So governments may or may not be direct producers of wealth (defined as good and services), but should always play a sustaining role at the very least, doing those things that private individuals or companies cannot do, or do not do as well. The most proper roles of government and "free enterprise" have not yet been established, IMO. I can think of very few natural monopolies, for example, that would not better serve the people when run by governments, as long as they were representative ones, and subject to proper public control and oversight.

A key point in the article was:

"Contrary to popular belief, the more government spends, the worse it is for the health of the economy and thus for economic growth."

Again, as above, the truth of this statement depends on the type of government and the type of economy, as well as where it gets it money and what it spends it on. That is a lot of conditionals. :cool: I could add more, but I think the point is made. For example, if the govt spend on military or police protection that would ensure safer flow of trade or commerce, that expenditure would add to the economic growth of the whole. It would then be aiding in the production of wealth. This would be true even under our current unsustainable economic models.

Gino goes on to add the truly key point:

"If they created new money to enhance that environment, then productive capacity would increase and that new money would not be deployed into non-productive investments."

IF the govt CREATED new money instead of borrowing it at interest from the central banks (Fed) then the spending of that money on durable, long lived infrastructure, would indeed be productive, and would add greatly to the economy in a multiplying ripple effect. And it would do so without adding debt or raising taxes on anyone!

The real shift in thinking comes from the abstract concept of public money creation in place of private money creation. In either paradigm that money is created out of nothing, but with private money there is an ultimately unserviceable interest burden that will always ultimately collapse the entire system.

That is the tip of the iceberg we are just beginning to witness.

More later...

Kelly
2nd November 2008, 18:05
I don't know how many of you have already seen this 10 minute video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf8PDaCjnmQ

Mick posted it on another thread, but it absolutely plays into this discussion. It helps to give you the BIG picture of what is going on today, where the control is coming from, and what they intend to do.

Like FedFixNix said, all these different monetary ideologies all stem from the same source, and that source is the same controllers this video talks about.

The warnings this video presents are evident all around us today.

FedFixNix
2nd November 2008, 18:49
I don't know how many of you have already seen this 10 minute video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf8PDaCjnmQ

Mick posted it on another thread, but it absolutely plays into this discussion. It helps to give you the BIG picture of what is going on today, where the control is coming from, and what they intend to do.

Like FedFixNix said, all these different monetary ideologies all stem from the same source, and that source is the same controllers this video talks about.

The warnings this video presents are evident all around us today.

Thanks Kelly. Yes, nearly every major school of economics today and for the last 300 years has served some aspect of the Rothschild - Bank of England - Illuminati led NWO.

I hadn't seen this video, but I have seen most of the earlier Lyndon LaRouche articles and videos. It is a patchwork of some of them, along with updated commentary and analysis by La Rouche. I have long considered him an "interesting" source of information. But most of his main points are also verified by NWO "insider" historian Carroll Quiqley, who wrote "Tragedy and Hope", a contemporary history of the development of the modern NWO. He only published it because even in the 1960s he felt it was too late for anyone to stop it.

Got to get dinner.... :D