Tuesday, March 11, 2014

Hello Keyneian ideals.

After reading this article my blood pressure was a little high, I suspect that this is due to a combination of Keynesian economics, western culture, and specialized philosophers who cannot tie their shoes.  
How did these people get into this field in the first place? (Please someone answer me this)
Limiting my rant to two topics in particular, one, spending is not the key, two printing money is not the key. These solutions, though they can be put to use to “stimulate” the economy are in my opinion some to the worst possible tools to use.
When one is trying to cool down or speed up the economy, one must consider human nature. If the economy is in a recession and jobs are tight, the rational individual will be drawn to spend less and save more, (This is a simple concept that goes over most economists heads) that is Human Nature. If the economy is speeding up and there are many opportunities to make money, people will become freer with their purchases, and investments.
This Human Nature relationship with the economy can be the cause of bubbles and recessions. However the Rules of The Game also play a significant role in determining the boom and bust cycle of the economy. The point I want to make here is that the economy (nationally) is partially driven by human nature, and partially by the environment that the economy creates. But which leads to which, is this the cause or the effect?
Isolation and verification on this scale is currently beyond our technological ability. So the point is moot.
With this in mind, Economist and those in power, are generally to detached and operating on limited information; as a result these individuals or groups are making decisions that often go against these two basic Human Nature assumptions I have put forth. This results in an economic train wreck and the people in power scratching their heads wondering why their plan did not work.
Both Keynes and Hayek made some valid economic points, Hayek more so than Keynes in my opinion. That said, I feel that both economists failed to take into account two important factors: People and environment.
Silvio Gesell, following Keynes path is looking at a WAR TIME ECONMOY. This is fine, so long as you intend your country to remain in a state of war perpetually. Otherwise the information used to sculpt his theories is flawed. Even the article goes to mention that Gesell had a “Hysterical rhetoric” in his writing. This alone should result in his work being thrown out on grounds of un-empirical. If one has to get emotional to make a point, it is likely that Normative in base.
Lastly, trying to free the land of rent, and money of interest is nothing short of madness. 

No comments:

Post a Comment