Obama - your racism is showing.

ps. I am guessing your trying to read up on Austrian Economics, which is a very politically motivates sect. And any good economist should say that they can work out the numbers of a situation and may be able to decide which is the most beneficial. But when you start to go into 'right/wrong' you really start to leave the world of economics, and it gets into a gut feeling again.

If you want to find out more about the Keynes vs Hayek debate, go to itunes and get the free download: John Maynard Keynes and Hayek, department of economics- notable speakers, bruce cadwell, Duke University Department of Economics.

There is a whole series it is pretty informative.

It is you who haven't done your homework.... look up a biography of Keynes and get back to me when ur infrmed of his OWN admission it doesn't work.... it is of couyrse the MULTIPLIER factor which doesn't jive with reality. Keynes depends on static numbers...but in real life, they are NOT static, and that is why it fails every time it is tried....and it HAS failed every time it is employed.

Sorry.... ur following the WRONG economic path, and it will never get you where you want to go.

Only Friedman principles can catapult the US economy into true prosperity, as has ALREADY been proven.

Keynes...unproven

Friedman ... proven.

See how that works? And it does work...every time.

Do you not realize how fanatical you sound? Have you somehow confused economics with religion?

Or are you just void of reason?

Because your use of absolute terms really comes off that way.

If you would take a breath, realize you don't really have some inside look, and may just may have not realized what has been happening in the economy over the last 80 years to the extent you believe you do. You may realize that both have had their successes and failures.

Again, like I had said, at full employment, both classical and keynes models match up. But at times where unemployment gets above 6%ish the models start to move apart. Because the classical model assumes full employment, while keynes did not.

I actually like the classical model for more micro research, and do understand why they have the assumption of full employment. But in the real world, unemployment is not just a mechanism of choice. So that is when Keynes comes in handy.

Also if you realized Friedman was a genius, you should also know that for a lot of his career he followed the Keynesian system, so it couldn't be that bad right? And as he worked on his monetary and consumption theories, he developed new things, and tried to fill in some holes that were in both models.

See that is how sciences work, you know this. Economics is still pretty darn new compared to other sciences, and there is still a lot of work to do. But still it is pretty darn accurate.

And without any really accurate way to measure or track all this, the best models will fall apart, because the data is corrupted and it is not going to fit perfectly.



So when you say one is bad, one is good, maybe you should think about how much you actually know, and how much your basing your ideology on faith.

Because they both have been very successful over the years. Keynes is more of a stable slow growth, very light recessions, that is more easily manageable. And since Reagan the neo-classical model has been huge bursts of growth, followed by little deeper recessions that is far less manageable. Add to it every republican since has somehow had a huge recession every term of their presidency it adds up to them doing something wrong.

They both keep everything pointed in the right direction, I just prefer more stability and less risk. If you are determined to believe that we don't have control over our economic destiny, well then keep up with your bible studies.

Not fanatical.... identifying the correct economic model to follow to prosperity (goal perhaps?) is hardly fanatical.... it's just being correct.

The models being used by Obama are NOT correct.

Keynes only works on PAPER. It does NOT work in real life, as has been PROVEN...and admitted by KEYNES himself!!

Have you once shown anything that he convinced was wrong and led to his entire model falling apart?

See I am willing to bet it was an early book of his (if you watched that itunes video I told you about you would see) that he gathered a lot of it from a swiss economist that was written in German which he did not understand, so there were things in that which were wrong, but in later publications he reworked them.

What and where does everything come undone?

You say his multiplier is wrong, well where is it wrong? How is it wrong? What is the multiplier you are referring to?

And fyi Keynes died in the 40's before everything was really being used, so how could he possibly know it wouldn't work? Especially when the last years of his life he was working to help people to understand better the nature of the actual economy, which you yourself have said you know there is periods of unemployment, which is assumed away in the classical economic theories.

You really don't seem to know what your talking about, and are basically saying "nuh-uh I am right", which is about the same as the religious zelots out there that say dinosaurs lived with people.

Maybe you should just walk away from this one, nobody will think badly of you.

But if you have actual things to back up these claims go for it, I am very curious to what it is you are pulling this shit from. I am guessing your reading up on Austrian Economics, which is more a political belief than a actual economic theory, but that could be wrong.

I am currently getting a actuarial economics degree, and going to pursue my PHD after I wrap up the next year.

I had a lot of time to prepare getting back into school because I was putting my fiance' through school to get her Pharmacy doctor. So I used a few years before that to read as many economic books as possible, everything from basic books on economics (more entertainment books, to simple textbooks), moved onto reading websites dedicated to economics, and realizing that I was just getting opinions before, and what I thought I was learning was basically useless for anything other than learning about cause and effects, and history of things.

So I moved on to textbooks, starting with a very old Money, Banking, and Financial Markets book that I got off Amazon when I downloaded the book list by class that the University of Michigan uses.

Another thing that has really helped is coming onto websites like this(I learned a lot about stats by arguing with racists on racist websites that tried to pass off as 'news'). I actually try to listen to what people are saying and dissecting it by doing some due diligence on reading the websites that their information comes from. Not only has this helped open my eyes to how much garbage is actually out there, but it has also helped me to see why people disagree on issues, when they really have the same conclusion. They just don't tend to understand why they disagree. And it is usually in who they are listening to.

And how statistics are used in ways that are misleading, that is why I always try to see the statistics that they are using, so that I can see why they are saying what they are saying. And to see if it is actually a legit reasoning, or if it is just biased misinformation.

hanimmal said:

I am currently getting a actuarial economics degree, and going to pursue my PHD after I wrap up the next year.

I had a lot of time to prepare getting back into school because I was putting my fiance' through school to get her Pharmacy doctor. So I used a few years before that to read as many economic books as possible, everything from basic books on economics (more entertainment books, to simple textbooks), moved onto reading websites dedicated to economics, and realizing that I was just getting opinions before, and what I thought I was learning was basically useless for anything other than learning about cause and effects, and history of things.

So I moved on to textbooks, starting with a very old Money, Banking, and Financial Markets book that I got off Amazon when I downloaded the book list by class that the University of Michigan uses.

Another thing that has really helped is coming onto websites like this(I learned a lot about stats by arguing with racists on racist websites that tried to pass off as 'news'). I actually try to listen to what people are saying and dissecting it by doing some due diligence on reading the websites that their information comes from. Not only has this helped open my eyes to how much garbage is actually out there, but it has also helped me to see why people disagree on issues, when they really have the same conclusion. They just don't tend to understand why they disagree. And it is usually in who they are listening to.

And how statistics are used in ways that are misleading, that is why I always try to see the statistics that they are using, so that I can see why they are saying what they are saying. And to see if it is actually a legit reasoning, or if it is just biased misinformation.

Click to expand...

Nice, a lot of that sounds similar to the way I conduct research myself.

Economics I find to be pretty foreign, but with the whole next depression shit we've been going through, I've been trying to understand more about it, the way the whole system works.

Thanks for the insight.