In Economics, Do You Subscribe to the Keynesian or Austrian School?

[FreedomAli]

What is your position? Do you subscribe the the Austrian school of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Hans Hermann Hoppe, or do you follow the Keynesian theory of Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson?

If you don't know, then list yourself as undecided and allow proponents for the two schools to try to win you to their side by the strength of their arguments.

 

[8537]

1. Greenspan is not a Keynesian.

2. Paulson's not an economist, and if he had a school it would be Lucas / RBC.

3. Geithner and Bernanke are NeoKeynesians, which are really just warmed over monetarists.

4. There are far more than two schools.

 

[FreedomAli]

You should attribute your quote, ""These are the values inspiring those brave workers in Poland … They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.", to Reagan.

I wonder what all the anti-union stooges who like to invoke his name would say, especially when you consider that he was a union president.

 

[FreedomAli]

Okay, so then what other schools offer themselves as substitutes to Keynesianism whose support exceeds that of the Austrian theorists in your estimation? And, don't bring up Marxism.

 

[Toro]

Schools of economic thought - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[xsited1]

What is your position? Do you subscribe the the Austrian school of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Hans Hermann Hoppe, or do you follow the Keynesian theory of Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson?

If you don't know, then list yourself as undecided and allow proponents for the two schools to try to win you to their side by the strength of their arguments.

Just two choices? Well, considering that Keynesian economic theory has been debunked, I'll go with the latter.

 

[skeptic]

1. Greenspan is not a Keynesian.

2. Paulson's not an economist, and if he had a school it would be Lucas / RBC.

3. Geithner and Bernanke are NeoKeynesians, which are really just warmed over monetarists.

4. There are far more than two schools.

I had to applaud this post publicly. So many idiots, so little time, thanks for the brevity.

 

[Mini 14]

Gotta agree....

Keynes has been proven failure, and I wouldn't call myself an Austrian.

 

[dilloduck]

What's an economycist ?

 

[JBeukema]

I am a self-describes Austro-Marxian (not to be confused with Austromarxist)

My understanding of the market's daily affairs is drawn largely from the writings of Thomas E. Woods Jr and other modern Austrians, though I see the need for socialist reforms. Government stimulus is a treatment for underlying conditions- especially disproportionate wealth accumulation among the bourgeoisie- that need to be addressed long-term. History is best understood as the competition between classes and in-groups.

 

[skeptic]

What is your position? Do you subscribe the the Austrian school of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Hans Hermann Hoppe, or do you follow the Keynesian theory of Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson?

If you don't know, then list yourself as undecided and allow proponents for the two schools to try to win you to their side by the strength of their arguments.

Your dichotomy is a lot like the strawman dichotomy of either socialism and commyism or full frontal capitalism.

While in reality there has never been any such thing as communism or capitalism, and Keynesian economics is the preferred choice of the right wing, even tho they ignorantly deny it, the right is a Keynesian stronghold.

The right just doesn't realize that monetarism, Milton Friedman and the Chicago school all rely extremely heavily on Keynes' basic premises.

But the real fatal sin in your presentation is that you assume that A) either side of your dichotomy is correct (and neither are) or B) that it is either one or the other (it is both and neither).

But that is what happens when you erect strawmen around a subject that you neither understand or around a dichotomy that is pure fantasy.

Earth to idiot: Keynes and Moses are just theorists, their ideas are just theories, as such they are neither right or wrong and theirs are certainly not the only theories.

Economics is a simplistic, convoluted study of mythical constructs and states. The economy is a complex, dynamic system of actual real world events and circumstances. Simplistic theories can not possibly corral the real economy into a box where it can be treated like a mere equation or maxim set.

The economy is like earthquakes, no amount of psuedo-science will ever be able to explain, predict or account for them except in hindsight.

 

[skeptic]

History is best understood as the competition between classes and in-groups.

Any sensible anthropologist would surely agree. Economics is about competition for mates, food, security and survival of the fittest.

The science of economics is actually just a sophisticated ruse employed to justify the tyranny of banking and an elite class.

 

[skeptic]

Gotta agree....

Keynes has been proven failure, and I wouldn't call myself an Austrian.

You kneel at the altar of Keynes everyday and you don't even realize it.

 

[Mini 14]

Gotta agree....

Keynes has been proven failure, and I wouldn't call myself an Austrian.

You kneel at the altar of Keynes everyday and you don't even realize it.

WTF are you talking about?

You asked which theory we subscribe to, not what policies we live under.

Oh wait.....I get it.......

It was never intended to be a question.....you're going to give a sermon.

Carry on, Billy.

 

[8537]

Okay, so then what other schools offer themselves as substitutes to Keynesianism whose support exceeds that of the Austrian theorists in your estimation? And, don't bring up Marxism.

Rational Expectations, Real business cycle theorists, Public Choice and especially monetarists.

 

[Mini 14]

I'm more interested in why he wants to exclude Marx, than which theory he thinks is best.

He is obviously one of those who has read the Manifesto and thinks he understand Marx.

Barring Marx in ANY Economic discussion is like talking about English Lit, but not Shakespeare, personal computing, but not Bill Gates.

 

[Ava]

What is your position? Do you subscribe the the Austrian school of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Hans Hermann Hoppe, or do you follow the Keynesian theory of Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson?

If you don't know, then list yourself as undecided and allow proponents for the two schools to try to win you to their side by the strength of their arguments.

I tend to go with Ron Paul ( Austrian ), Ronald Reagan ( Trickle-down, supply side ) and Milton Freidman, "Friedmanism" - the belief that changes in money supply dictate fluctuations in the economy - supplanted Keynesianism as the dominant economic philosophy of the industrial world. Also Ayn Rand's laissez-faire capitalism. In other words, a supporter of the job creators.

"Ayn Rand, was a Russian-born American novelist and philosopher. She is widely known for her best-selling novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, and for developing a philosophical system she called Objectivism. She was an uncompromising advocate of rational individualism and laissez-faire capitalism, and vociferously opposed socialism, altruism, and other contemporary philosophical trends. She is generally either hated or loved. Her objectivist philosophy had a strong influence on the evolution of the Libertarian political philosophy movement (though she rejected the title)."

Top 25 Ayn Rand Quotes

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

What is your position? Do you subscribe the the Austrian school of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Hans Hermann Hoppe, or do you follow the Keynesian theory of Greenspan, Bernanke, Geithner and Paulson?

If you don't know, then list yourself as undecided and allow proponents for the two schools to try to win you to their side by the strength of their arguments.

I think it would be best if you just stop posting on the internet for about 10 years .

 

[skeptic]

Gotta agree....

Keynes has been proven failure, and I wouldn't call myself an Austrian.

You kneel at the altar of Keynes everyday and you don't even realize it.

WTF are you talking about?

You asked which theory we subscribe to, not what policies we live under.

Oh wait.....I get it.......

It was never intended to be a question.....you're going to give a sermon.

Carry on, Billy.

You are a Keynesian and you don't even know it.

 

[skeptic]

I'm more interested in why he wants to exclude Marx, than which theory he thinks is best.

He is obviously one of those who has read the Manifesto and thinks he understand Marx.

Barring Marx in ANY Economic discussion is like talking about English Lit, but not Shakespeare, personal computing, but not Bill Gates.

Please elaborate. I knew you were a Marxist but I didn't realize that you knew it as well.