Keynesian video compilations | Recent Business Videos

A few people from the stewart/colbert rally letting the reporter ...
Posted by: DJEK73

Video duration: 107 seconds
Global video hits: 173896

A few people from the stewart/colbert rally letting the reporter know that they dont think President Obama is a KEYNESIAN.

Related: obama is not a keynesian, stewart colbert rally, restore sanity rally

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

I know that I ...
By: ryanthomastew. on 18 May 12, 18:42:49
I know that I support it but classic.?

I feel like I know ...
By: ryanthomastew. on 18 May 12, 18:42:28
I feel like I know where you? stand on Prop 19 sir.

It also called ...
By: 1379gerardo. on 18 May 12, 02:40:03
It also called Monaco, and its one of the wealthiest countries? on Earth.

Can't stand the ...
By: gozaderadrfunk. on 17 May 12, 14:56:41
Can't stand the republican flock on social issues and can't become? part of the ill informed democratic party hive. I am an individual and I will vote for Gary Johnson in November.

Nobody in? that ...
By: TurkishHegemony. on 17 May 12, 14:40:10
Nobody in? that crowd knew what a Keynesian is, they thought the interviewer meant "Kenyan", and Obama's supposedly faked birth certificate and rumours of him being Kenyan and not American.

You know? it!
By: garrethdavis. on 16 May 12, 19:34:54
You know? it!

Truth is truth..... ...
By: Retiredhawk. on 16 May 12, 17:30:48
Truth is truth........ even? if the socialists deny it

Ron Paul is Winning ...
By: Hydrogenagent. on 16 May 12, 15:21:59
Ron Paul is Winning, dont listen to the lying media, they wont get in trouble for lying to? you unless you sue, and even then good luck.

:)?
By: Hydrogenagent. on 16 May 12, 15:20:46
:)?

Romney supporters ...
By: garrethdavis. on 16 May 12, 15:16:21
Romney supporters yes, Paul supporters no. Paul supporters? are the educated and well-informed you'll find.

you should check ...
By: slayer3to10. on 14 May 12, 03:29:48
you should check out the republican party's supporters? if you want to see some ignorance.

Funniest video I've ...
By: 5994fps. on 14 May 12, 00:48:38
Funniest video I've seen today. Reinforces my theory that 80% of people are? idiots.

learn economics.... ...
By: BenjaminIsRight. on 11 May 12, 20:29:57
learn economics.... mises.org ?

Most of these ...
By: BenjaminIsRight. on 11 May 12, 20:28:56
Most of these people need to learn economics! ?

haahahaha?
By: BenjaminIsRight. on 11 May 12, 20:27:48
haahahaha?

OMG..Can you say ...
By: Joskel362. on 11 May 12, 17:29:23
OMG..Can you say discredited idiots?!??

Liberal Blinders! ...
By: 247FreedomOps. on 11 May 12, 04:05:41
Liberal Blinders! LOL!?

lol?
By: ElementHDMac. on 11 May 12, 02:57:55
lol?

These? are the ...
By: MrBeardstyle. on 10 May 12, 23:53:05
These? are the people who vote

im pretty? sure ...
By: frappexo. on 10 May 12, 22:33:12
im pretty? sure they're a mickey mouse hitler in the background. 99% sure

these? people don't ...
By: DavidDayPraise. on 10 May 12, 22:21:27
these? people don't deserve to vote

ahahahahahahah this ...
By: elisala3menda. on 10 May 12, 21:38:08
ahahahahahahah this is so funny! by the way the journalist is super hot! :D?

Yea, he should have ...
By: nalejbank. on 10 May 12, 09:27:25
Yea, he should have done the "reveal" at the end? after they showed how lazy and prejudice they are. Did you notice how none of them could put together an intelligent sentence! You might as well let dogs vote!

What you are ...
By: nalejbank. on 10 May 12, 09:23:34
What you are witnessing in this video is the result of ignorance, laziness, and a hyper sensitized socialist rabidness. This is the result of government teaching your adult children and the great experiment in "democracy". You know, the one man, one vote mantra. The parents of these college students are sending them to largely radicalization centers. Voters should have to quote? and explain the 2nd Amendment to? the Constitution before voting.

What you are ...
By: nalejbank. on 10 May 12, 09:22:34
What you are witnessing in this? video is the result of ignorance, laziness, and a hyper sensitized socialist rabidness. This is the result of government teaching your adult children and the great experiment in "democracy". You know, the one man, one vote mantra. The parents of these college students are sending them to largely radicalization centers. Voters should have to quote and explain the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution before voting.

Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics
Posted by: Austrianomics

Video duration: 613 seconds
Global video hits: 98930

austrianomics.com Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics Featuring Ben Bernanke, Paul Krugman, Peter Schiff, and Ron Paul Also check out www.youtube.com

Related: austrian, economics, keynes, keynesian, financial, crisis, housing, bubble, economy, peter schiff, ben bernanke, paul krugman, ron paul

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

(5) Economics in ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 19:34:05
(5) Economics in the US is solely taught Neoliberal economics, this makes all research out of the US heavily biased and was a key reason for the recent financial crisis was that Economic intellectuals only told? the Government and Wall Strt what it wanted to hear, and believed the crash was mathematically impossible. Do you deny the importance government in regard to interest rates?

(4) but imports ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 19:30:44
(4) but imports less expensive. This is useful in a boom/bust as you can increase/decrease the demand for your goods. 5. The affect of Hot Money, this is most important for western economies as? it affectively dictates the value of currency. High interests attract foreign sources to save money in domestic banks. This capital is then used to fund domestic investments. It is also crucial for the oil market as it is solely sold in dollars, therefore high US interest rates increases the price of oil.

(3) Interest Rates ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 19:27:07
(3) Interest Rates play several important roles. 1. Lowering interest rates makes it easier for consumers to borrow money, either for mortgages, investment. As Keynes argued this is paramount in a recession to free up money to fund investment and return money into the circular flow. 2. In a boom, governments increase interest rates to encourage savings thus curtailing investments. 3. Most importantly is the affect on exchange rates. High interest rates? increases makes exports more expensive,

(2) You seem to ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 19:22:29
(2) You seem to think all governments are totalitarian in nature and have never done anything good to progress humanity. You assume any? actions any action taken by the government will always be bad when that it simply not true. Why is that such a scandal?

(1)No, The American ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 19:19:44
(1)No, The American Civil War made slavery obsolete. That is an undeniable fact. Point out where I said that? only the military create anything? It was military funding though that created all modern communications and GPS. Stop reading into things that I never said. I have great faith in the market system, it is the most affective system for signalling lags in supply and demand. It takes entrepreneurship to recognise wants that havn't been satisfied. I've never denied this.

Entrepreneurship ...
By: sigatus. on 27 May 12, 18:59:15
Entrepreneurship created the technology that made slaves obsolete.? You are assuming that if government/the military didn't create something, it would never get created. Why wouldn't it get created? If there is a demand for it, it will be provided by the market. Can you answer for me a simple question? What role do interest rates play in the economy? I take issue with the statement, "All economists agree on this point." because that is false. Many real economists at The Mises Institute disagree.

(2) Infrastructure ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 18:20:26
(2) Infrastructure cannot be maintained by the private sector because of the free rider problem. All economists agree on this point. Furthermore, would you really allow private companies take over? defence, policing, the judicial system and the fire service? As proved by the recent financial crisis, you need regulation or corruption and human greed will take over and that will not be for the betterment of society!

So by your ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 18:17:10
So by your interpretation the entrepreneurship of the Slave Trade was good for humanity? I don't deny that entrepreneurs have had a great impact on progressing humanity, but some of the greatest technological advances have come through the military funded by the government and taxation!? it was FDRs Keynesian economics and the multiplier effect it created, that made America the strongest nation on earth.

All infrastructure ...
By: sigatus. on 27 May 12, 17:41:02
All infrastructure can be produced and maintained by investment from the private sector. What truly allowed humanity to progress was the extremely small government the US had? up until the mid 1900s. You seem the think that bureaucrats can steal money from some people, give it to others, and thereby create wealth. It's utter nonsense. The ONLY people who have ever helped humanity progress are entrepreneurs. We owe all our wealth, security, and technology to them.

How would you pay ...
By: 23RMD. on 27 May 12, 09:44:00
How would you pay for Infrastructure, defence and education without? taxation? (I wont mention health care) The only reason why humanity has progressed is because of government. You see freedom as being from government, I see it as being protected by government.

It is disingenuous ...
By: sigatus. on 26 May 12, 23:00:04
It is disingenuous to compare Somalia and the US. You need to compare Somalia to its neighbors: bit.ly / pStlPq You are correct: Government and Wall Street ARE one in the same. When have I denied that? The point is that the solution to the problem is NOT more government. Also, every single year the US government threatens me with? imprisonment (violence) if I refuse to pay their taxes. Taxation is extortion.

It is disingenuous ...
By: sigatus. on 26 May 12, 22:57:11
It is disingenuous to compare Somalia to the US. What you should do is compare it to other neighboring countries. A study has been done on this: bit.ly / pStlPq You are correct: Government and Wall Street are one? in the same. Have I ever denied that? The answer though is not more government. Also, the US government threatens to imprison me every single year if I don't pay their taxes. Taxation is extortion.

Firstly, that is ...
By: 23RMD. on 26 May 12, 19:51:17
Firstly, that is utter bullshit! Would you? really rather live in Somalia than the US? One of the most destitute, unstable, brutal, AIDS ridden countries on the planet? You must be trolling!! The reason you government bails out Wall Strt (as I've mentioned 3 times now) is that they are one and the same. When was the last time the US government used against you (and I mean you specifically) violence and coercion? I can't believe what you are saying, and if you actually believe it.

Since the fall of ...
By: sigatus. on 26 May 12, 18:18:34
Since the fall of their brutal dictatorship, Somalia has been doing much better. The recent crisis has? proven what happens when you (the government) insure banks against losses. There is nothing to stop the banks from gambling with other people's money when they know they are going to get bailed out. I utterly reject the notion that violence and coercion (i.e., the government) will lead to the betterment of society in general.

Yes because having ...
By: 23RMD. on 26 May 12, 18:10:38
Yes because having no government is working so well for Somalia. The recent crisis has proven what happens when you do not regulate markets. Greed takes over. There is nothing to stop Neo-liberalism from destroying itself. The same reason that communism failed is the same reason why capitalism will collapse. You cannot take the greed out of man. I utterly reject the notion that the individual looking out for himself will lead to the? betterment of society in general.

I prefer anarcho- ...
By: sigatus. on 26 May 12, 18:04:46
I prefer anarcho-capitalism.? I reject the notion that government is virtuous, since it is funded by theft and coercion.

So you would prefer ...
By: 23RMD. on 26 May 12, 17:57:38
So you would prefer anarchy? It is not that government is broken, more that democracy is. As I said earlier, Wall Street and the Government are so in bed with each other,? the Government doesn't protect the very people it was created to protect.

Government itself ...
By: sigatus. on 26 May 12, 17:53:30
Government itself is not virtuous. People lobby the government? to use their power. I ask, why does the government have such power in the first place? It shouldn't.

Is it virtuous for ...
By: 23RMD. on 26 May 12, 17:48:31
Is it virtuous for Wall street billionaires to lobby Congress to pass legislation to prevent legislation in a market that forces the poorest to take out loans to just survive. Then the billions they make out of the 99% misery shouldn't be taxed? and they shouldn't be forced to help repair the world they fucked? You've have been blinded and brainwashed by an ideology that protects the rich. It is baffling that they made millions vote against their economic interests? by saying 'socialism'.

Sorry, but I do not ...
By: sigatus. on 25 May 12, 16:56:04
Sorry, but I do not think it is virtuous to steal from the rich (at? gunpoint... i.e., the IRS) to give to the poor.

The reason why we ...
By: 23RMD. on 25 May 12, 10:03:22
The reason why we humans invented a liberal democracy is so that the richest in society can help provide for the poorest that can't afford insurance. A system that has been poisoned by an ideology that protects enormously wealthy? firms and individuals, brainwashes people into voting against their economic interests, then continues to fuck the poor by forcing them into debt because its good for Wall St. And if they can't afford insurance, it's their own fault as they didn't work hard enough.

Getting injured in ...
By: sigatus. on 24 May 12, 18:53:05
Getting injured in an an automobile accident is why we humans invented insurance. Further, I take issue with your statement? that NHS provides "free" health care. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Everything government gives must be taken from someone else. It's NOT free, so stop calling it free.

You're completely ...
By: 23RMD. on 24 May 12, 10:35:25
You're completely missing the point. Point out where I mentioned that the NHS is a financially sound institution? You're blinded by your neoliberal ideology. The purpose of the NHS is not profit! It? is to provide people with free health care. I can't help but notice you never answer any of my questions. The NHS is nowhere near a perfect institution, but its better than nothing. Now tell me why the someone should be crippled by debt after they have been crippled by a car?

Here are some of ...
By: sigatus. on 24 May 12, 04:42:08
Here are some of the latest headlines about NHS: "Many NHS trusts 'rationing cataract surgery'" "More evidence of the need for NHS reform?" "NHS could 'run out of GPs' over pensions, claims BMA?" "NHS? reforms risk health service meltdown, says BMA chief?" "Diabetes: 24000 Deaths A Year Blamed On NHS?" ...all of these were found in a Google News search for "uk nhs" on 05/24/2012. Why don't you tell me more about how financially sound NHS is?

Im from the UK. We ...
By: 23RMD. on 21 May 12, 15:22:19
Im from the UK. We have the NHS, and none of what you just mentioned. Private healthcare is available and? admittedly better than what the NHS can provide. But not everyone can afford it. We don't have to have a credit card or insurance if we get hit by a car. We don't have people plunged into debt by events that were no fault of their own. I don't see the humanitarian logic of financially crippling someone for getting hit by a car. Can you?

Keynesian Vs Monetarist on the LRAS curve
Posted by: pajholden

Video duration: 497 seconds
Global video hits: 80456

why these two schools of economic thought disagree on the shape of the LRAS curve - a disagreement borne out of their differing views on the ability of labour markets to clear during recssions.

Related: economics, business, keynes, monetarist, macro, macroeconomics, a-level, level, holden, labour, marketing, management

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

oh, you babe?
By: Triggerz12234. on 24 May 12, 16:45:21
oh, you babe?

This is amazing, ...
By: kjeoy. on 19 May 12, 12:03:00
This is amazing, you are crystal clear on what to me is percieved? as complex matters of economics :)

excellent video, ...
By: philiphartnett. on 17 May 12, 17:24:14
excellent video, well done, I have an? exam next week and this is great

very nice!? i used ...
By: milesjordan239. on 15 May 12, 09:21:04
very nice!? i used to rack discipline but now i understand!

Brilliant!?
By: fernandapc91. on 01 May 12, 21:44:41
Brilliant!?

why my teacher can ...
By: catherinewwww. on 27 Apr 12, 18:54:19
why my teacher can never explain things like you do? this has offically become my fav video THANKYOU? SO MUCH!!!

Thanks a lot!!! My ...
By: 4everSponge. on 14 Apr 12, 02:37:21
Thanks a lot!!! My teacher is horrible and? this cleared this issue up very quickly for me :)

The inclusion of ...
By: RShahProductions. on 12 Apr 12, 20:12:04
The inclusion of the initial Demand/Supply diagram finally made a bulb flick in? my? head, and then several other bulbs. Thank you to you AND your parents ;D

i honestly don't ...
By: comewithyoursunshine. on 10 Apr 12, 15:57:40
i honestly don't know what i would do without? you. thank you!

Monetarist is? ...
By: DONHSD. on 22 Mar 12, 17:05:33
Monetarist is? different from new classical? LRAS right?

Now what's ...
By: mootant. on 02 Mar 12, 02:35:36
Now what's interesting is how? Keynesian steering works when half of your workers are in China.

Holden Economics Vs ...
By: UnlimitedEconZone. on 25 Feb 12, 21:42:59
Holden Economics Vs All the other crap? :D

Thank you so much!! ...
By: dasharpest92. on 15 Dec 11, 19:41:14
Thank you so much!!!?

Paj, you make the ...
By: miskmiskm. on 10 Oct 11, 18:49:39
Paj, you make the best videos!!!!!! THANKS SO MUCH!!!!!!?

i subscribed to you ...
By: TheBlastBR. on 05 Oct 11, 20:09:43
i subscribed to you. This is so going to be useful for my IB exam in? may!!!!

like this comment ...
By: tbotrouble6. on 13 Sep 11, 10:32:37
like this comment if you think it really helped!!...yes you!?

if we go back to ...
By: motters2012. on 11 Aug 11, 06:56:55
if we go back to the same LRAS are we assuming that all? those made unemployed, revise their wage and all decide to still take on jobs but at lower wages?

you said that the ...
By: motters2012. on 11 Aug 11, 06:19:21
you said that the labor market? always clears thus full employment level of output is at any equilibrium (labor market diagram) really. So why in your second diagram involving the LRAS is there only one particular level of output that is the full employment level of output?

ur videos are ...
By: Bhaveshagarwal89. on 21 Jul 11, 10:42:06
ur videos are really awesome.. i have got the confidence to read Macro economics.. thaanks to u sir.. Rock ONNN? sir..

this was absolutely ...
By: carrotxdawg. on 19 Jul 11, 11:07:31
this was absolutely fantastic. if i could hug? you i would. perhaps settle for an ehug?

I like the sound of ...
By: pajholden. on 24 Jun 11, 06:29:52
I like the sound of that!?

if you were to ...
By: srubaiani. on 14 Jun 11, 00:04:32
if you were to live in the Roman ages, you would be one of the Roman lords, and they would call the lord of Macroeconomics (Macromeleus). Thanks a million. Exam is in two hours and I have never been that confident to sit an? economics exam. Cheers P.S. the demand for you to teach in Auckland New Zealand is very high...

What if everybody ...
By: therrydicule. on 10 Jun 11, 10:36:45
What if everybody was right? I think that the relation might depend of what type of employment - if a country have more employment in really hi-tech and really specialized domain, maybe the data will be more in favor of keynesian, but if it tend? to be more generalist that it will tend to be more monetarist? Or do I get something wrong here...

Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Posted by: misesmedia

Video duration: 2338 seconds
Global video hits: 38310

Presented by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. at "The Failure of the Keynesian State," the Mises Circle in Houston, sponsored by Jeremy S. Davis. Recorded Saturday, 23 January 2010. Includes introductory remarks by Mises Institute president Douglas E. French.

Related: thomas, e., tom, woods, american, history, keynes, ludwig, von, mises, institute, circle, houston, texas, austrian, economics, recession, depression

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

It's sad that there ...
By: PureAdrenaline97. on 30 Apr 12, 06:44:10
It's sad that there is only? 37,552 views on April 29th 2012 when this video was posted more then 2 years ago.

Of course, the only ...
By: Visfen. on 21 Mar 12, 15:14:51
Of course, the only honest man in the race and the only one who understand the problem. Heck, even marxists have to agree hat he's? the only one who understand that there are structural imbalances caused by institutional rigidity and the problems are not in over-production or under-consumption but the pattern of investments and some sectors being favored over others (Say's law).

Wow, excellent ...
By: jdowfleetwood. on 16 Mar 12, 22:03:12
Wow, excellent rebutal to the points made in this? video.

This guy is an ...
By: iksandrr. on 15 Mar 12, 16:43:43
This guy is an idiot.?

@Visfen Fair enough ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 04:11:04
@Visfen Fair enough. Clearly you're well educated and well versed in polisci. I will look into the concepts you've put forth. I'm not an econ major? (actually I'm no major at all as I'm only starting my 3rd year) so you'll have to forgive my ignorance... Too fucking tired now.

I did define it, I ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:56:11
I did define it, I want polycentric law because I think that maximizes intersbujective consensus. I want to organize society with markets and property rights, not with democracy and state ownership. I'm making as much as an effort I can to make you? understand me, but to some extent I know you wont. I want people like you, that are not extremely stupid, to understand that the median theorem which you tout is designed to fit the stupid masses, you're smarter than that (I think).

My feeling is that ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:52:58
My feeling is that you think you're more reasonable if you're not "absolutist".? You're not, you're just being annoying. You have to have one principle over all else. Libertarians it's property or self-ownership. If you don't have this you will have weird laws and rules against each other. Ancient Athens was definitely democratic. Just because they precluded some people doesn't mean they are not democratic. Children can't vote. You can be authoritarian and democratic.

Evidecned by the ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:50:11
Evidecned by the fact I cannot even? type a cogent or coherent sentence.

Just as you've ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:49:32
Just as you've failed to define your concepts. I'm not writing an academic? article here, I'm debating on stupid YouTube message bored at 11pm after a 9hr shift..

I don't hold it as ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:47:38
I don't hold it as an absolute value. And, as I've said, I do not subscribe to democratic peace theory. I believe it's quite a hasty and asinine presumption that democracies are somehow inherently more peaceful. Although to be fair, ancient greece was hardly democratic (not even athens) and other greek city states such as spart were highly authoritarian/ militaristic? (some say fascist).

Then it's ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:46:08
Then it's absolutely not true and I don't know how you can even say that with a straight? face. Before market liberalization you have less options for trade, in fact often forced to do standardized trade and sometimes even not allowed to trade with people that don't live in your tax farm (country). With market liberalization you get more trading opportunities. That's not even talking about the immense increase in material wealth that allow you to get education and whatnot.

I don't mean in an ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:44:02
I don't mean in an absolute sense. I mean equality of opportunity? (not only in developing states).

ameliorating ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:37:04
ameliorating inequalities? No it's not, just another assumption. Also uninteresting, only insane people care about equality in such a sense. You have to be a certain kind of moron to have the world be poorer just so long as it was more equal. To actually have jealousy as a value relevant to how society should be? formed is silly. I will say however, I used to believe all the stuff you believed, until I actually became a real intellectual and challenged my assumptions.

WWII and WWI, that ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:34:42
WWII and WWI, that is damning evidence against DPT. Also ancient Greece. Also all democracies ever.? It's a stupid theory. Maybe? It is. The problem is that you're supporting your assumption with circular reasoning, so you don't even seem to be aware of it. Do you really hold democracy as the highest value ? That is what you're left with. If you me and a friend of mine were on an island, we could then vote to make you or slave? No? Why? What value is higher?

If you have ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 03:28:32
If you have democracy as the highest ideal it is higher than freedom. You can not have a system that doesn't prioritize one ideal above all else. You definition of freedom could just as well be to rape people or kill jews. Everything can be about semantics, it's the morons debate. What I mean is that? democracy is in conflict with freedom. I am not interested in theories of collective will, as it doesn't exist, only individual will/value exists. The social contract = slavery

First,? I do not ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:22:33
First,? I do not subscribe to the DPT, I was merely stating it was an option. What evidence do you speak of (for my personal enlightenment..). Of course it may be an assumption. So are most moral or normative claims. It is not empirically sufficient for me to say that humans are inherently good, but it can be supported normatively. non sequitur: Also, it is well-known that markets alone are incapable of ameliorating inequalities etc. Of course that is moving into different territory.

It is semantics, ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 03:15:18
It is semantics, though, since you must define what you mean by freedom within the context of democracy. If I mean the freedom to vote on particular ideas, people, etc that represent my opinions then that is one type/ definition of freedom. Democratic theory is predicated on that freedom.. More so, when you say "against freedom," what do you mean. Why do I feel as if we have to discuss the social contract or other? theories of collective will..

I would suggest ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:58:03
I would suggest that it silly to believe it to be true with modern history and the two world wars of the 20th century. Democracy =/= peace. But you're not defending democracy by any standard then, you say it's a human right, because we make the assumption that it is, based on consensus from democracy. I hold that we can find better consensus with markets, which there is evidence from beyond just assumptions. It is intersubjective consensus we are seeking so? it matters.

Well, in respect to ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 02:53:07
Well, in respect to democratic principles being an often held precursor to widely-accepted values such as "human rights" you may argue that, yes, it is equatable with human well-being. And depending on your definition of war and democracy (clearly there are many opinions), one may? subscribe to democratic peace theory--which I assume you understand.

Also, it's not an ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:43:56
Also, it's not an argument about semantics to say democracy have nothing to do with freedom. Freedom is not 51% rule over 49%, it is a distinctive word that ha meaning. You can argue that academia and everyone else? use the word wrong, but you probably wouldn't be successful saying everyone but you are using language wrong. Fact is democracy is a way to organize things that is against freedom. Everyone just assumes democracy is the best way to find consensus. Which is stupid.

So the argument ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:41:14
So the argument then is "well, they did protect this industry that failed in every case, before they liberated, so it happened before therefor it happened because". That's propter hoc, and why I call people who believe it idiots, because it's one of the most common logical fallacies used and if you are to call yourself anything above an idiot you should be aware of? it There are examples of new markets and countries that liberated without protection, so the theory fails the test

What do you mean ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:38:51
What do you mean hardly? Are you saying democracy equates to human well being? Democracy is an awfully inefficient system to run things by so in the sense that we have a market with property rights instead of a democracy, that is a good thing if we like efficiency. I like efficiency because I like less deaths, more? stuff, more prosperity and longer lives. Yes, and the industries they selected, dominantly the textile industry in every case FAILED when markets were liberated.

"Democracy has ...
By: mikewtp. on 07 Feb 12, 02:36:20
"Democracy has nothing to do with freedom." That's a semantic? argument. More so, this is more my point. What is the end objective. If you maintain democracy is irrelevant for good economic policy (which China proves you right), then what is the normative goal? Human well-being? Hardly.. The historical precedent set by East Asia is not one of blanket protectionism (which I never argued for), but one of selective protectionism. Governed-market theory, if you will.

Democracy has ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:12:14
Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. In fact in a broader sense, democracy is irrelevant for good economic policy, if anything it creates bad economic policies, take Arrow's Impossibility theorem. And in that sense the Arab spring is a failure and Pinochet a success. It's such a moronic theory it makes anyone? who believe it an idiot. It's not because you disagree with me, it's because you accept a theory that doesn't pass simple rules for science and reason.

Which isn't proof ...
By: Visfen. on 07 Feb 12, 02:06:24
Which isn't proof or even evidence that they are connected. We had mercantalism in Europe before industrialization as well, that is true. But the only real positive? change came with opening of the markets, and then the? industries that were protected collapsed within months if not days. So where is there any reasonable causal link in this? It doesn't work in theory as well. I think it has, because I have studied that, far more than you have. I don't exaggerate it, I understand it.

Hayek on Keynes (1978)
Posted by: Malthus0

Video duration: 178 seconds
Global video hits: 85555

Friedrich Hayek talking about how the revival of his reputation is bound up with the failure of Keynesianism. The full interview was conducted by Thomas W. Hazlett in November 12, 1978 & can be found here hayek.ufm.edu

Related: N/A

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

Wrong! Laissez ...
By: psilocyberspaceman. on 27 May 12, 03:01:02
Wrong! Laissez faire was not the cause - inflation of money supply was. This is evident by the Federal Reserves tightening in 1928 in a desperate try to prevent the effects of their own monster creation. Advocating statism and limiting free market (essentially life, liberty, and property) is by all means flawed, immoral and unjustified. The regulations made by government? after the crash only made things worse.

laissez faire was ...
By: algrand90. on 25 May 12, 15:30:00
laissez faire was the cause of the 1929 crash and the 30's crisis ordoliberalism adocated astrong? state that regulates the market by a legal corpus (especially competition lawin order to prevent cartels and trust ) and not with stimulus and stabilization policies

"Ordoliberalism is ...
By: psilocyberspaceman. on 25 May 12, 15:15:41
"Ordoliberalism is a German variant of neoliberalism that emphasises the need for the state to ensure that the free market produces results? close to its theoretical potential." Can you spot the word "state"?

did? i say statism ...
By: algrand90. on 25 May 12, 09:59:05
did? i say statism ??? i said ordoliberalsm the german social market economy ..

Has never been! ...
By: psilocyberspaceman. on 25 May 12, 02:22:45
Has never been! Statism has never been? the solution, it is, in fact, the problem.

I agree that giving ...
By: Ooftyman. on 24 May 12, 23:06:49
I agree that giving the thumbs down simply out of disagreement is silly. However, I think you've misunderstood Hayekian thought. Here's how Bastiat would respond: "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all."?

Thank you for this ...
By: sonnybrown. on 24 May 12, 21:14:48
Thank you for this and tanks for? the captions!

paleoliberalism is ...
By: algrand90. on 23 May 12, 21:57:37
paleoliberalism is no? longer the solution

I disagree. Statism ...
By: psilocyberspaceman. on 23 May 12, 18:25:16
I disagree. Statism is build on initiation of force, which I? define as the root cause for the economic problems, among other things.

the solution to our ...
By: algrand90. on 23 May 12, 17:46:55
the solution to our economic? problems is ordoliberalism

The fact is that ...
By: psilocyberspaceman. on 23 May 12, 12:49:03
The fact is that you did not put forward an argument. What you put? forward is a claim with the lack of argument to support it.

Oh, I forgot. Yes, ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 23 May 12, 11:03:31
Oh, I forgot. Yes, Kucinich as some, a few good ideas, but he's an entrenched "liberal", not a libertarian, as you might think. The Republicans, as I've said have the best? platform: pro-business, pro-Constitution, pro-flat tax, pro-smaller government, anti-excessive entitlements, pro-defense. Now compare to the Democrats: pro-excessive government spending, pro-excessive entitlements, anti-Constitution, anti-business, pro-high taxes, pro-minority anti-defense. This might simplify things for you.

Maybe one of your ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 23 May 12, 10:57:17
Maybe one of your other comments.?

Read Milton ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 23 May 12, 10:39:36
Read Milton Friedman re: the cause of the Great Depression. He's on Youtube. It wasn't greed; it wasn't busines like the "liberals" say; it was the carelessiness of the Federal Reserive. Friedman has a great book; I believe it's called Monetarism. Read it, and don't use "liberal" disinformation to blame the business world. Business saves, not destroys, and government spending hurts, not helps. The FDR? policies hurt, not helped. Another myth is destroyed: FDR.

... The second ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 23 May 12, 03:53:01
... The second period occurred under very loose money which? was able to keep the economy going despite structural problems. That was 1980-1992 and grew the National Debt from 30% of GDP to 65% of GDP in just 12 years of Republican control.

I think you are ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 23 May 12, 03:50:51
I think you are making a huge mistake if you say Plato was a utopian, Dennis Kucinich is another liberal, therefore Dennis Kucinich must be an authoritarian. But that is getting away? from what really matters. We have had two periods in the last century where free market ideals were mostly tested under Republican presidencies for 12 years in a row. The first period occurred under tight money from 1920-1932 and caused the Great Depression.

century with " ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 22 May 12, 11:14:48
century with "liberals" spending more on the proletariat, as Marx called them, and not lifting them out of poverty. It's an evil ideology, and Obama is an arch Marxist, which is scary. Fox Business the other day said that 17 new taxes take effect in January? 2013. More taxes means less freedom, and you should be afraid that we're losing our freedom under the "liberal" regime. So, don't be afraid to read about liberals; your freedom depends on it.

ideals to formulate ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 22 May 12, 11:08:52
ideals to formulate American democratic government. Now compare the two schools: the Utopians (who are actually tyrants) and the real liberals (our founding fathers), and you see the schocking nature of today's "liberals:" they're actually liberal fascists, wanting extreme State control, rather than loose, non-intrusive,benign democratic contol by the citizens. Now we're? on this path with LBJ's Great Society creating more poverty than wealth, and continuing into this

a tyrrannical form ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 22 May 12, 11:03:51
a tyrrannical form of one man rule government. Marx advocates a tyrrannical form of government throught the State. Many have listened to him: Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler, Mussolini, Obama. "Liberals" of today are? really wolves in sheep's clothing because they are the "utopians" who advocate government like these idealists mentioned. Levin mentions Locke, de Tocqueville, Montesquieu to show the great strain of democratic spirit from which our founding fathers derived their democratic

I read them and ...
By: MrRickywallace. on 22 May 12, 10:58:54
I read them and wouldn't quote the entire books as it? would be as long as the books. This is simple.You're "not interested in what liberals are really like?" If you knew the history of "progressives" or "liberals", then you might be shocked at what their platforms really are. These authors show what "liberals" really are. Levin shows that utopians like Plato (which we read in college) advocates a tyrannical form of governing. Thomas More, supposedly a humanist like "liberals, " advocates

Keynes came into ...
By: bruceduece1. on 22 May 12, 05:42:48
Keynes came into vogue after the war for a reason. The world was weary of war and economic calamity. It was decided that the decisions that affect the planet would be better served when made by representative governments instead of a handful of greedy men in search of greater profit. I agree with that. When history repeats itself, as it always does, when Keynes legacy is discarded by profiteers, then you? , if you survive, will be weary too.

If the economic ...
By: bruceduece1. on 22 May 12, 05:34:39
If the economic indicators of the post WWII years are an indication, Keynes was a smashing success. We entered the greatest era of prosperity in human history. why don't the neocons ever admit that? I suspect that, like my comment that? was voted off, the truth interferes with their agenda; convincing the masses that we'd be better off if we dismantled regulations and the social apparatus. Sure, Let's go back to the Good Old Days, like Nov. 1929, or December 1941, when ruthless capitalism reigned

"Government ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 22 May 12, 05:30:07
"Government entitlements are socialistic when they're excessive and contribute to mediocrity, poverty, and economic instablity." Here is the deal. If that is true, then we? should be able to see it in action somewhere. Where do you think this might have happened? "The poor are actually mooching off of the rich first, then the middle class. Rich people pay 70 % of taxes; the poor pay almost nothing. So who's really the oppressed?" What is this in reference to?

"Read "Liberal ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 22 May 12, 05:27:20
"Read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg and "Ameritopia"? by Mark Levin." I am starting to think you just summarized them. I am not interested in the least to learn what liberals are really like. That sounds like 300 pages of insults with no facts. In my opinions the real liberals are the ones that have an open mind and prefer a growing economy to the great depression.

"The State in order ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 22 May 12, 05:21:18
"The State in order to give "poor" people things has to rigidly? control the government because taxes are a means of control." You have hit on a central truth there. Republicans in office don't legislate to benefit the poor. But what you may not realize is the cutoff for being poor is around $200,000 a year. Anybody who makes under $200k sees their income grow faster under democrats than republicans. And don't forget that every law has both beneficiaries and victims.

Keynesian Economics
Posted by: khanacademy

Video duration: 725 seconds
Global video hits: 18544

Contrasting Keynesian and Classical Thinking

Related: macroeconomics, keynes

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

you should? do ...
By: KyleTVProductions. on 23 May 12, 03:52:46
you should? do austrian economics

Khan should? do ...
By: Hawkallica. on 08 May 12, 21:11:25
Khan should? do Austrian Economics!

In the depression.. ...
By: bwpeplinski. on 06 May 12, 11:50:31
In the depression... The economy was ill and needed intervention... Much? like a person. The error was that once the intervention was given ... We never stopped medicating... And keynes idea that in the long run were all dead - Cared nothing for the future we create. He validated the live now suffer unto a later generation ideology ... A person, doesn't live in the long run but people do.

@khanacademy why ...
By: ManVersusDebt. on 06 May 12, 10:41:59
@khanacademy why can't I find this on your actual website?? give me a link plz?

or would fixing it ...
By: skydome29. on 02 May 12, 06:38:51
or would fixing it cause? the unnecessary suffering, I think time proved the latter was more true.

"A dictum of Lord ...
By: Neightkelly. on 20 Apr 12, 15:49:05
"A dictum of Lord Keynes: In the long run we are all dead. I do not question the truth of this statement; I even consider it as the only? correct declaration of the neo-British Cambridge school." -- Austrian Economist Ludwig von Mises

Keynes said "In the ...
By: socctty. on 16 Apr 12, 08:06:34
Keynes said "In the long run, we are all dead" somewhat tongue in cheek. He wasn't being pessimistic. He was shining a? light on what he thought was an over-emphasis of the idea that the economy would fix itself and stabilize in the long run. So his point was that yes, things would EVENTUALLY get better, but in the meantime there'd be enormous unnecessary suffering.

i think you? ...
By: MrDereklol. on 14 Apr 12, 22:56:01
i think you? totallt missed the point of that quote

"In the long run, ...
By: vickiormindyb. on 08 Apr 12, 19:57:35
"In the long run, we're all dead?" What a positive thinker HE is. If I thought that, people would tell me I'm "being negative." He says it and he's a great person? smdh I'd love to hear what you think about the actual politicians who are saying things about the economy, b/c I'd like to? know whom to vote for. But my economist friend said the president does NOT control the National Budget. He said Congress does. Which explains to ME why it's a gd mess.

This is better than ...
By: zerker12568901. on 31 Mar 12, 16:48:54
This is better than school , haha. ?

what about the ...
By: isedairi. on 26 Mar 12, 23:59:43
what about the critique of a downward sloping AD curve not? being very realistic?

The problem is that ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 26 Mar 12, 04:05:16
The problem is that you expect it all to happen overnight. Nothing can solve everything tomorrow, especially not when it is in the hands of bureaucrats who know nothing about solving such problems. Using force will not solve the troubles at hand will make them worse and irreversible. Consider an attempt to make everyone more wealthy and products more avilable without making others poorer. In short, there is an unequal distribution of? capitalism in the world, not capital.

i'd argue that the ...
By: ontheotherhandx6. on 25 Mar 12, 04:00:22
i'd argue that the only thing the market and for profit system does is make profits of problems. if it were actually solving problems, we'd have completely clean energy instead of energy that pollutes our waters, air, and bodies, and entire ecosystem at that. we'd all have health care, since we have the? means and technology to provide health care for all. same goes for healthy food and clean water. those are all human needs yet they're only made available to those that can afford them.

Since we have more ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 25 Mar 12, 03:30:56
Since we have more than enough domestically, you're right; there is no need. The "imperialism" stems from needing to expand the market for our worthless money, not our products. To buy oil almost anywhere, a country has to first buy dollars. The? profit system has led to exponential leaps in innovation since the dawn of time. The problem is state involvement in picking winners and losers. The market can correct itself easily, whereas the gov't has always been wrong.

Awesome Awesome ...
By: whartanto2. on 24 Mar 12, 04:11:19
Awesome Awesome explanation of Keynesian economics - I tried to read the General Theories, but all the equations confused the? hell out of me. Thank you!

well no doubt that ...
By: ontheotherhandx6. on 24 Mar 12, 02:21:37
well no doubt that the self-interest of big oil stands in the way of alternate competition. it's not new. oil companies have owned the patents to longer lasting more powerful car batteries for decades, and have refused to allow them to be produced (see: Ovonics, Chevron, & Cobasys). I know that's their view, thinking in terms of profits. But there's constant energy surrounding us, at we leave it on the table (solar, wind, geothermal, tidal, wave). And those don't poison? our water or air.

How much does the ...
By: lmcdowall. on 23 Mar 12, 21:18:29
How much does the petrodollar effect development of alternative energy? I mean you can't sell sun-dollars. What would happen if there was a lot of volatility in the that system? I always just thought: to leave oil in the ground, is to leave money on the table. The companies? who extract oil want to maximize profits as-much-as possible and leaving oil in ground is anathema to that. But I wonder if it is more complex than just that? What would happen if we had petroruble or petroyuan ?

Ongoing dependency ...
By: ontheotherhandx6. on 23 Mar 12, 19:59:12
Ongoing dependency on foreign oil for our energy is not a promising outlook, that just means more imperialism and nationalistic tensions. And I completely agree that said types of batteries aren't being made available because it's not profitable. That's the sad truth about our current 'economic' paradigm;? if one cannot profit from solving a social problem, it won't get solved.

There is enough oil ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 22 Mar 12, 23:36:44
There is enough oil to last for a minimum of 400 years at current growth projections. Again, you can thank the gov't-sanctioned cartells of BP and OPEC for helping to regulate their competition out of the market. Batteries gat better all the time, but are not good enough (and/or cheap enough) to justify their use. Again if it were currently profitable, someone would? be doing it. Space stations use such batteies, yes-- on public money, at prices no individual would pay.

en . wikipedia . ...
By: ontheotherhandx6. on 22 Mar 12, 23:35:26
en . wikipedia . org/wiki/Capacitor#Energy_storage "A capacitor can store electric energy when disconnected from its charging circuit, so it can be used like a temporary battery. Capacitors are commonly used in electronic devices to maintain power supply while batteries are being changed. (This prevents loss of information in volatile memory.)" but semantics aside, the point? is the same. the excess energy can be stored for intermittency

um... no. ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 22 Mar 12, 23:29:58
um... no. Capacitors store voltage; inductors store current. Batteries supply a constant power source within a circuit. Capacitors build up a charge and discharge all at? once.

yes capacitors = ...
By: ontheotherhandx6. on 22 Mar 12, 23:24:47
yes capacitors = battery. even if there weren't any in existence, it's not because of a lack of technological realization. batteries have continually gotten stronger and more compact, so in my view that's the least of the issues. and oil is relatively scarce, and becoming scarcer with use as oil isn't renewable. and capacitors? could be built with durability in mind. we only know cheaply made batteries that expire, but think about space stations that also use batteries, top of the line ones.

Also, I think ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 22 Mar 12, 23:20:49
Also, I think anyone who could provide electricity cheaper would make a killing, but investing in that much realestate just isn't worth it. It is evedently not so abundant, since nobody is investing in it. And profit is the whole point. If nobody can make money producing it, then why do so? Any way it is produced, there is a negative cash flow, so everyone is poorer as a result. That doesn't make it cheap? at all.

Oil is by no means ...
By: fleetcenturion. on 22 Mar 12, 23:13:23
Oil is by no means scarce, and the problem is that it IS being controlled, instead of being drilled as fast as possible by every mom & pop who? can invest in an oil well. There is no capacitor (I think you mean battery) that can store 1/3 of a day's electricity, especially when night is when most electricity gets used. Batteries also take resources to produce and would have to be continuously replaced from use.

Revisiting the Economics of John Maynard Keynes | PBS NewsHour
Posted by: PBSNewsHour

Video duration: 552 seconds
Global video hits: 26106

Long before the great recession of 2008, late economist John Maynard Keynes conceived the notion that the federal government could, and sometimes should, intervene with the economy.

Related: john maynard keynes, economics, great recession, free market, government intervention, pbs newshour

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Milton Friedman Discusses John Maynard Keynes
Posted by: CommonSenseCap

Video duration: 78 seconds
Global video hits: 39701

To Watch the Entire Free to Choose series: commonsensecapitalis m.blogspot.com Website: commonsensecapitalis m.blogspot.com Facebook www.facebook.com Twitter: twitter.com

Related: milton friedman, john maynard keynes, common sense capitalism

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

Milton Friedman ...
By: MartianSanta. on 18 May 12, 19:07:52
Milton Friedman was an ass simple as that?

Yeah, Obama? is ...
By: BrandonCRC. on 08 Apr 12, 19:16:41
Yeah, Obama? is much better because he has only increased the national debt by 6 trillion. watch?v=rw8VdST6gbM Watch this, you might learn something.

he would make up ...
By: Zatzzo. on 05 Apr 12, 14:20:46
he would make up some nice sounding fluff as always. ?

amen? to that ...
By: nubemuffin. on 27 Mar 12, 21:28:28
amen? to that brother

I told you? so.
By: davidf95. on 22 Mar 12, 15:32:05
I told you? so.

The president ...
By: 8TheManWithNoName8. on 19 Mar 12, 20:24:35
The president chooses from a list made by the major banks, and it is an "independent" agency, which is bs in a system with checks and balances but the Fed cannot be interfered with whatsoever. All private businesses are more regulated by the? Congress than the Federal Reserve.

- The Federal ...
By: Slipknotyk06. on 16 Mar 12, 05:09:28
- The Federal Reserve isn't entirely private.? Its governors are appointed by the President, and the Congress is supposed to oversee its operations. What true 'private' system operates in such a way?

- What happened to ...
By: Slipknotyk06. on 16 Mar 12, 04:58:26
- What happened to subprime loans made by private lenders? 2 things: cut into CDOs,? and also sold to GSEs. Sometimes, both happens ($434 BILLION in subprime mortgage-backed securities were sold to the GSEs.) The GSEs created a condition in which the banks could liquidate bad paper while retaining the good.

You're talking ...
By: Zachmozach. on 13 Mar 12, 19:56:51
You're talking about GSEs and although they did encourage lending to poorer neighborhoods in 1995 it was the private banking institutions that cut these mortgages up into CDOs and marketed them as AAA rated investments (in some cases even though they knew they were junk). Besides only More than 84% of the subprime? mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions. As in not the GSEs of which you're speaking. Private loans defaulted at 6x the rate of GSE loans.

Do you know who ...
By: Zachmozach. on 13 Mar 12, 19:41:38
Do you know who sets interest rates or decides who qualifies for a loan? If you think it's the government you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the economic system operates. Interest rates are controlled by a private central bank known as the federal reserve. The reason the banks got "insurance" on these mortgages was because of a private third party rating system that gave AIG a AAA rating even in? 2008 a day before they collapsed.

So we are supposed ...
By: drstrangelove09. on 05 Mar 12, 20:50:27
So we are supposed to accept this just because he? said it?

Aggregate demand is ...
By: tothemax01. on 03 Mar 12, 09:34:06
Aggregate demand is a junk concept. Its probably the worst of his contributions to the world. By allowing economists and politicians to view economies as blobs, which can be prodded by 'stimulus' to 'get going again', he has permitted the growth of socialism and government interference,? by allowing them to claim 'all economic actions are equally good, be they by government command or by private enterprise'. If we'd never had him, we'd be much better off.

fundamentally, ...
By: TheInfernal36. on 01 Mar 12, 07:40:41
fundamentally, keynsians believes that during a recession, government spending can stimulate aggregate consumer demand and that in itself, causes a multiplier effect that can lead us out of a recession. Neoclassicalists view that the best thing to do is to use the fed's powers to create optimal conditions for the free market to recover on its own. BAsed on the latest econometric data(which? at best can only make inferences at this point)...the keynsians have been wrong in this regard.

Neither deflation/ ...
By: tugger. on 24 Feb 12, 06:35:30
Neither deflation/inflation are bad things in themselves. There are overall fluctuations in currency value due to 'natural'? phenomena.

@zacharycat: That's ...
By: tugger. on 24 Feb 12, 06:33:59
@zacharycat: That's where you are mistaken. Capitalism is? not an idea. It was not conceptualized into being. It is the name we have given free exchange between free individuals. Sort of like how Evolution is not an invention, it is a discovery.

So generous. In ...
By: SrijitSanyal. on 16 Feb 12, 19:16:24
So generous. In reality, even Keynes' own original teachings were horribly unclear on the point that "stimulative" activities only applied during the persistence of an output gap - that stimulus pressing against potential output would yield inflation not growth. The root problem was his overemphasis on the "outmodedness" of the Classical doctrines which preceded him. Keynes did have a? valuable contribution - he taught us to care about aggregate demand. But Friedman knew he got a lot else wrong.

321 banks in the? ...
By: Greylin91. on 12 Feb 12, 14:35:49
321 banks in the? USA have been allowed to fail since 2008. Just sayin' brah.

Friedman's points ...
By: zacharycat. on 11 Feb 12, 21:27:37
Friedman's points about taking any idea to an? extreme are valid. That includes Keynesianism, socialism, or laissez-faire capitalism.

@migkillertwo ...
By: itcanbecheezcaketime. on 07 Feb 12, 23:53:27
@migkillertwo That's ridiculous. Anyone would agree that deflation is a bad thing.. and so is inflation. But the banks and the monopolies falsely prop up the value of the money in the first place. They should not be there to? begin with. You're missing the bigger picture here. He would not agree that taking taxes from people to prop up huge, multi-national, mega-banks is what we should do. Absolutely not! He would say LET THEM FALL. Let the economy return to its natural state.

In regards to what ...
By: SuperGuitarman69. on 07 Feb 12, 23:35:51
In regards to what Milton Friedman would of thought of the bank bailouts? For you even to suggest that Milton was such a monetarist and would have favored? bank bailouts is insane.. I served in 1996 on a think tank team under his direction in the mid west.. We knew that this was going to happen.. We seen policy factors that were trending in the direction of Nationalization of the banks.. Friedman was completely against this.. Banks needed to fail.. We all said it!

Doesn't matter what ...
By: SuperGuitarman69. on 07 Feb 12, 23:32:20
Doesn't matter what you wrote.. Krugman is a moron.. He was pushing that Fannie and Freddie were solvent.. When Peter? was screaming at the top of his lungs (including me) that it was going to crash housing.. Secondly, we are expected to hit 8.2% inflation this year.. So Schiff was correct once again.. The trend will not end if Obama remains in office.. And as far as Krugman goes? He isn't worth discussing. He is paid off by the Democratic party.. A Princeton reject

"All of his ...
By: migkillertwo. on 07 Feb 12, 23:12:31
"All of his rhetoric alludes..." No, no, no, a million times no. Friedman said, unequivocally, that the Federal reserve should have had a more aggressive inflationary monetary policy in 1929 to prevent the Great Depression in the book he coauthored with Anna Schwarts "A Monetary History of the United States." He understood perfectly well that deflation destroyed our? economy then, and it would have destroyed our economy in 2008.

@migkillertwo I ...
By: itcanbecheezcaketime. on 07 Feb 12, 23:04:57
@migkillertwo I disagree. I think he would have let those banks fall too. All of his rhetoric alludes to the fact that he would avoid government intrusion into any? aspect of the market, including the banks. The banks are monopolies propped up by the federal government and I'm certain he would have wanted them to fail. Those financial arms shouldn't exist in the first place and they wouldn't without the government.

Maybe not the car ...
By: migkillertwo. on 07 Feb 12, 21:47:28
Maybe not the car companies, but he definitely would have bailed out the banks. Friedman understood the disastrous effects of deflation, and he would have understood perfectly well the? deflationary effects of letting most of the biggest financial firms go under.

@migkillertwo It ...
By: itcanbecheezcaketime. on 07 Feb 12, 20:36:46
@migkillertwo It was sarcasm... sorta. I disagree with you, though. When Milton was talking about chrysler (not sure if it was in another video or not), he wanted them to fail. He did not want the government to prop up chrysler automotive just so? that we could have 1 more car company. It is a reasonable assumption that Milton would not have bailed out the banks, the car companies, etc.

Obama TRAPPED in Keynesian Twilight Zone
Posted by: mnmajoritydotorg

Video duration: 169 seconds
Global video hits: 37380

President Obama's latest jobs speech was like watching the rerun of a bad horror movie. He repeatedly repackages his failed Keynesian economic policies into the next "big" jobs program. In response, our economy crumbles around us. President Obama is clearly trapped in the Keynesian Twilight Zone. Twitter hashtag #KeynesianTwilightZo ne Bitly link bit.ly

Related: twilight zone, keynesian twilight zone, keynesian economics, john maynard keynes, barack obama, president obama, american jobs act

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

Everything this ...
By: MrBolas33. on 01 Apr 12, 21:22:33
Everything this butthole touches turns? to shit. What a loser.

Great video! Well ...
By: WeirdCrazyShortGuy. on 08 Mar 12, 15:15:18
Great video! Well done!?

ok brainwashed ...
By: doctorw2. on 18 Dec 11, 22:05:19
ok brainwashed person go on believing the the finacial world works on your so? called basic economics ok while the banks and corporations rob you blind. you dont know anything about how the real world works.

Your arguments are ...
By: EGarrett01. on 18 Dec 11, 21:44:41
Your arguments are completely ignorant of basic economic principles. You're wasting your breath because you haven't even studied the most elementary aspects of the subject? you're droning on about.

you dont understand ...
By: doctorw2. on 18 Dec 11, 21:39:06
you dont understand how real world economics work ok i do and let me tell you something people are so gulliable and stupid to believe anything anyone tells them without looking into something more in depth and examining the evidence. thats why the finacial institutions are screwing everyone including the government sensless and continue to do all these finacial infractions with impunity becuase of people with your mindset the status quo miligram mind. people better wake up!?

You? need to ...
By: EGarrett01. on 18 Dec 11, 21:30:17
You? need to understand something before you can proclaim whether it's right or wrong. You don't understand basic economics. At all.

listen all the ...
By: doctorw2. on 18 Dec 11, 21:13:43
listen all the colleges and universities in the world do not teach what really happens in the economic world all they teach is how economics work and im sorry thats not teaching anybody anything about what goes on behind the scenes. banks and companies spent billions of dollars lobbying than on taxes no surprise there since all these banks and companies do is beg and gamble with your money and cheat citizens out of their finacial rights.? go to college all you want they dont know shit

You don't? know ...
By: EGarrett01. on 18 Dec 11, 20:29:59
You don't? know anything about economics. I say that as politely as I can. You don't even know what you would learn in a first-year economics course in college. Please read something and stop typing.

This is EXACTLY how ...
By: EGarrett01. on 18 Dec 11, 20:27:48
This is EXACTLY how I felt watching this and Obama's speech from a week or two ago talking about how "millionaires and billionaires" need to help out a little bit more. The man is locked in pre-rational? liberal biases that came from growing up in a progressive home and never living outside of academia and the public-intellectual book market, from where he made his wealth. There's no way out for him and so he must be removed by the voters.

Thank you.? Vote ...
By: untilhowlong. on 17 Nov 11, 04:10:20
Thank you.? Vote for Obama. We like Obama.

After Keynes ...
By: Jacoby515. on 24 Oct 11, 20:11:17
After Keynes released his economics plan presidents like Nixon Carter tried it, and look how bad it was in the 1970s, even before Keynes in the 1930s Hoover and FDR with their corporate bailouts and stimulus? with the New Deal policies was Keynesian economics. Reagan stopped it during his term with returning to laissez faire economics and that led to economic boom during the 1980s and 90s because it allowed business to prosper.

Obama is a CON-MAN ...
By: RonaldBlair. on 14 Oct 11, 13:39:44
Obama is a CON-MAN with alotta rich people behind him who have covered his illicit past- He NEVER misses an opportunity for the TV spotlight because his likeability covers his CRIMINAL past and people ignore his 2 SSN's and the FORGED birth certificate- (Now on COFFEE-CUPS & T-SHIRTS) EVERY WORD from his? mouth is a LIE- The most secretive of ALL presidents- Every part of his past has been hidden- he even surrendered his law license to avoid investigation- OBAMA IS THE BIGGEST FRAUD OF ALL TIME-

Probably still ...
By: MNWildNJDevilfan. on 26 Sep 11, 03:48:40
Probably still waiting until his teleprompter to tell? him the way out of the Twilight Zone...

oh look, a con ...
By: ratty88. on 25 Sep 11, 20:51:10
oh look, a con circle jerk not one of you? has any clue about economics, math, science, government, or reality.

LOL? nicely done
By: TransylvaniaTapes. on 25 Sep 11, 01:10:23
LOL? nicely done

no one can create ...
By: NickChaChingas. on 24 Sep 11, 03:13:46
no one can create jobs. thats the sad truth. but i do not agree with the drastic far-right idea of cutting spending to save all of our problems. focusing on debt is exactly what? it sounds like - it does not focus on helping the american people. i know im gonna get a reply or two, or a million, but i can back everything i just said.

RESTORING THE ...
By: popovar78. on 24 Sep 11, 01:54:55
RESTORING THE AMERICAN DREAM: Search for free millions of jobs on the largest #1 job site worldwide, with over 50 million unique visitors and 1 billion job searches per month and is available in more than 50 countries and 26 languages, covering 94% of global GDP. We have jobs in every state county and city in the US. Plus job and resume? posting. Find your job today. To get started just google ( Jobs Linked To You ) Then start your job searching,

there isnt going to ...
By: doctorw2. on 23 Sep 11, 10:00:35
there isnt going to be any jobs created becuase as long the corporations? get tax breaks abroad and within the country they will just hoard the profits by slashing labour down and keep workers who will work for less thats the way they are making money and staying afloat in a very shaky economy. what needs to be done is a tax hike on outsourcing and a tax reduction only for those companies who create jobs within the country. this strategy will create jobs.

Let the? hate ...
By: CrispeyAgentZ. on 23 Sep 11, 06:47:59
Let the? hate comments begin!

we couldn't afford ...
By: ubberrubber. on 23 Sep 11, 02:56:17
we couldn't afford to rebuild this country if we made the mexicans work for free and do it ,,we've already seen how state and road crews work ..one working and 12 watching?

He suckered me to ...
By: MeccaEen. on 23 Sep 11, 01:58:46
He suckered me to vote. I guess I was hustled by a black? dude.

NO JOBS, MORE WARS, ...
By: kittytush. on 21 Sep 11, 17:51:34
NO JOBS, MORE WARS, MORE LIES!? sharing this video ;)

Heres the thing ...
By: haccduder. on 21 Sep 11, 01:23:49
Heres the thing with keysian economics. 99% of the people who are uttering the phrase couldn't tell me who keys was without going to wikipedia - They're just reitterating a talking point they heard somone smarter than them talk about. That being said Mr Obama? can't save the Economy. Nobody Can. We are in a downward spiral that comes with discovering and draining most of the worlds large oil reservers. My friends, welcome to the post Peak.

You are a tool and ...
By: MartyMoose12. on 20 Sep 11, 23:55:21
You are a tool and a moron sir.?

BIG BUSINESS ...
By: MartyMoose12. on 20 Sep 11, 23:54:35
BIG BUSINESS PROPAGANDA!? Don't be a tool, Don't fall for BS videos like this.

Keynesian Economics Is Wrong: Economic Growth Causes Consumer Spending, Not the Other Way Around
Posted by: CFPEcon101

Video duration: 300 seconds
Global video hits: 75795

Politicians and journalists who fixate on consumer spending are putting the cart before the horse. Consumer spending generally is a consequence of growth, not the cause of growth. This Center for Freedom and Prosperity video helps explain how to achieve more prosperity by looking at the differences between gross domestic product and gross domestic income. www.freedomandprospe rity.org

Related: gross domestic income, gdi, gross domestic product, gdp, keynes. keynesian, keynesianism, consumption, government, debt, deficit, freedom, prosperity. mitchell, quinlan, flat tax, spending. tax competition, cfp, cf&p

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

It is a wrong ...
By: arjun1951. on 27 May 12, 10:37:26
It is a wrong attempt to explain the Keynes' economic idealogy/employment theory. Keynes advocated controlled capitalism but the new economic order/reforms completely deviated from this idealogy so the consequences are economic disasters world-wide. The MPC has been increasing less than MPI so it failed to generate more employment opportunities? domestically: consumption is the cause of growth. For example: In India China products are being purchased more than Indian products.

Yes, Keynesian ...
By: nefigaha. on 26 May 12, 05:28:55
Yes, Keynesian economics is BS. It would? make sense if we were living in the fairyland world where its many false assumptions held true, where prices in the short-run & long-run never converged.

BS?
By: Eyrynomos. on 25 May 12, 11:54:52
BS?

How so?? Explain.
By: scienceatheism. on 22 May 12, 01:15:00
How so?? Explain.

in what way?
By: revan89898. on 02 May 12, 00:46:24
in what way?

Piffle?
By: BergansBeats. on 01 May 12, 09:30:23
Piffle?

Wherever the one ...
By: pattymcpatterstud1. on 11 Apr 12, 03:29:44
Wherever the one who earned the money wants it? to be spent.

As we speak more ...
By: VonManavis. on 10 Apr 12, 22:41:37
As we speak more money printing has? allowed Obama in 3 years to minimize unemployment under 9%. A little bit more taxing would have brought about a nice kickstart for your economy. That +3% all rich people where bitching about. Do I think that wealth is not being taxed enough? HELL YEAH!

"Where should the ...
By: ButtCutter216. on 10 Apr 12, 17:09:04
"Where should the money be spent"? The PROBLEM with Keynesian economics is that the government? has to initially get this money from some source, be it printing, taxing, etc. Most people that argue against the Keynesian way of thinking say that the government shouldn't have the money to begin with... Excessive printing destroys the value of your currency, and excessive taxing leads to politicians having the freedom to spend OUR money in ways that benefit themselves and their campaign contributors

weird kitchen?
By: footpot. on 08 Apr 12, 10:14:07
weird kitchen?

the? authors of ...
By: TheTilleray. on 07 Apr 12, 12:55:01
the? authors of this video are deluded

OK, WHERE SHOULD ...
By: VonManavis. on 24 Mar 12, 03:04:17
OK, WHERE SHOULD THE MONEY BE SPENT THEN!??????!!!!?

you are making this ...
By: hc167. on 15 Mar 12, 08:12:57
you are making this thing too complicated. it is simple. GDP=C+G+I+(E-Im). if E-Im is a positive number. then GDP really measure the actual economic output. if E-Im is zero. we are still measuring the economic output with balance of trade. if E-Im is negative (especially this number is very large), then the GDP is measuring how much resource? the economic is wasting. and we are doing this be sucking up the resources from other countries for our own good.

Please re-read what ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 13 Mar 12, 04:22:18
Please re-read what I wrote about inelastic supply and demand. Labor supply increases when wages decrease below fixed cost of living. This is one of the two classic debt traps. In one classic debt trap, debts are in foreign currencies and the inelasticity of supply and demand leads to hyperinflation. In the other, paid wages falls below? fixed cost of living and labor supply increases in response to wage drops, leading to Great Depression-style hyperdeflation.

"But for example,? ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 13 Mar 12, 04:18:12
"But for example,? it takes more than twice as many government dollars as free-market dollars to create the same job." That is simply not true in general. Please note that the laws of economics don't work the same under full employment and partial employment. In particular, under full employment, when labor is scarce, people are paid according to the value they contribute. Under partial employment, people are paid exclusively according to negotiating leverage.

Where did you get " ...
By: AnneOminous1. on 13 Mar 12, 03:14:25
Where did you get "microeconomic" out of that. Those are, as she stated, "pro-growth" policies that can be implemented by government. That is macroeconomics, not micro. The reasoning is more complex than some of the other points. But for example, it takes more than twice as many government dollars as free-market dollars to create the same job. That isn't a? controversial figure, it's simple history.

Investment becomes ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 12 Mar 12, 06:25:06
Investment becomes really important when it becomes the ingredient that is in short supply. In many cases, marginal investment is irrelevant because access to capital is? already high, and access to customer demand is the missing ingredient, not because customers don't want your goods or services, but because they can't afford to buy what they make. With dollars lying in fewer and fewer hands, how hard people compete for the decreasing number of dollars in general circulation becomes irrelevant

Hold on a minute ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 12 Mar 12, 06:17:03
Hold on a minute there!!! You completely lost the flow of the narrative when you talk about "employee compensation, corporate profits and small business income" and then segway into "lower tax rates, reducing the burden of government spending, trade liberalization...". Did we switch to microeconomics while I wasn't looking? Please show some math explaining how these relate to? the fundamental law of economics - that every good must be built and then consumed to count.

The destructive ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 12 Mar 12, 06:04:58
The destructive powers of labor working according to inelastic supply and demand are evident when the increased supply of labor feeds into a vicious deflationary circle as you saw at the beginning of the great depression. If you make 20% less, for a lot of families, that means working 10% more hours, which will drive wages down even further. There? is no "intrinsic value" of the labor that the market finds. Instead negotiating leverage forms a negative feedback loop.

The? pie chart at 2 ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 12 Mar 12, 06:01:22
The? pie chart at 2:10 is wrong. It completely ignores the fact that labor works according to the laws of inelastic supply and demand rather than the laws of elastic supply and demand. Normally you would assume labor would work according to normal supply and demand rules. On a microeconomic scale, this seems to work, as if you increase your offering price, labor supply increases and vice versa. On a national scale, the opposite is true, as MORE labor surfaces when wages go down.

um... Bad title. ...
By: sfjeff1089. on 12 Mar 12, 05:54:33
um... Bad title. Economic growth plays a part, but distribution of wealth also plays a part. I don't care how much efficiency improves if people on average lose the ability to afford to buy what they make. I do agree that relying on spending more money and decreasing savings to save the economy by increasing the velocity of money at best, but assuming that efficiency leads to income is disingenuous, especially since efficiency? is frequently achieved by decreasing labor costs.

Henry Hazlitt? The ...
By: illahham. on 11 Mar 12, 10:12:34
Henry Hazlitt? The economic autistic? The man that wrote economics in one lesson? Austrian economists are like flat? earthers. I can see why he is so appealing to so many people because he reduces economics to basic arithmetic- addition and subtraction.

Are you taking ...
By: sirellyn. on 11 Mar 12, 09:30:34
Are you taking about the same General Theory of Economics by Keynes refuted by Hazlet? in 1959 with The Failure of the "New Economics"?

Im... ... and i ...
By: jekobpl. on 09 Mar 12, 00:40:03
Im... ... and i read off of a paper?

Chomsky on market anarchism, Keynesianism & reformism
Posted by: mr1001nights

Video duration: 535 seconds
Global video hits: 30313

it's about people recognizing the limits of institutions

Related: chomsky

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

My question about ...
By: htiberian. on 25 May 12, 23:20:09
My question about worker-owned businesses is, "If they do a better job than top-down businesses, where are they?" I know there are a few out there, but why aren't they more? prevalent?

Chomsky said he ...
By: htiberian. on 25 May 12, 23:15:41
Chomsky said he doesn't know what capitalism is, but then he claims that anarcho-capitalism is a fallacy because capitalism requires government to prop it up? So, I guess that means we don't live in a capitalist society because governments need to violate market principals to thrive. But? then he agrees that we are a capitalist society?!?!?

Yea I am confused, ...
By: SlaveryEvolves. on 25 May 12, 15:14:52
Yea I am confused, didn't the health industry support Obama? why wouldn't those who benefit from mandatory health insurance support? it?

Why would a unified ...
By: ariuszarim. on 21 May 12, 16:42:03
Why would a unified defense require a state authority? There are numerous historical instances of individuals forming militant groups without state support. In fact, if there's no centralized control of a defensive? body, there can be no unified surrender. A huge group of scattered, isolated militant cells is significantly more powerful than any ordered military. Better still, mix the militants with the civilian population. Then an invader can never win. Think Stinger missiles vs Migs.

libertarian ...
By: WSilva832. on 21 May 12, 16:31:30
libertarian socialist communities that had developed in Spain were viciously? crushed by fascist, communist, and even neoliberal powers of the West before they could barely ever even stand a chance. The problem with libertarian socialism is a question of pragmatism; they're extremely threatening to the powers that be and highly vulnerable due to lack of a unified defense controlled by a state authority.

Well, the New Deal ...
By: JohanRegus12. on 28 Apr 12, 06:05:34
Well, the New Deal and the welfare programmes introduced were used to keep down any clamour for reform of the economic system, thereby saving coporate capitalism through government support at its hour of crisis. Not that I oppose Social Security, for example, but that was the purpose. And as Chomsky pointed out, that kind of support was? exactly why Roosevelt got the backing of substantial big business interests whom you usually would consider natural opponents of his agenda.

I pretty sure the ...
By: htiberian. on 26 Apr 12, 01:05:24
I pretty sure the opposite of everything he just said is true. FDR was a free-marketeer?!?

You can't repeal a ...
By: VotePaineJefferson. on 23 Apr 12, 23:42:04
You can't repeal a thousand years? of economic law through reform...

when you reply to ...
By: BuddhaBebop. on 19 Apr 12, 15:23:36
when you reply to one of your? own comments it doesnt send a notice to the other user at his email. fyi

It is a valid ...
By: ariuszarim. on 18 Apr 12, 01:22:11
It is a valid criticism, but not one I had intended to make. I suspect that part of history is not well known on purpose. *sigh* some other event of massive historical importance that I know next to nothing about. If I understand the timeline correctly, the Republican forces eventually surrendered. The collectivist society ended before the Spanish Civil War had concluded. I think the movement was stopped? before it ever had a chance to develop into an actual economy, or so it seems.

Well.. to my ...
By: DamiaanVDW. on 17 Apr 12, 21:43:11
Well.. to my understanding, the system in question (1936 Spanish Anarchism) was destroyed by fascist and communist armies. It wasn't the failure of? the system, unless you mean it failed to defend itself; this is certainly true, and is a very valid criticism of libertarian socialism (and anarchism in general).

Assuming that the ...
By: ariuszarim. on 16 Apr 12, 17:26:44
Assuming that the Spanish Revolution was totally representative of Chomsky's Libertarian Socialist vision, it is just another example that proves the rule. Just as every free-market capitalist society has developed into some form of state capitalism, every small state socialist society has grown into something like state socialism. My suspicion is that any form of a state will naturally aggregate power.? I maintain, the fault lies with individuals attempting to control the levers of power.

Untrue, I shall ...
By: DamiaanVDW. on 16 Apr 12, 17:13:26
Untrue, I shall only give one example,? but it is an example that almost totally represents Chomsky's politics (I believe); 1936 Spanish Revolution - check it out :)

The problem with ...
By: ariuszarim. on 15 Apr 12, 00:42:46
The problem with Chomsky's argument against true free-markets (namely, that they have never existed) is also valid as an argument against a socialist society. There has never been a society where the people owned and operated the means of production. Nor has there ever? been a welfare society in which socially powerful organizations didn't use the welfare engine as a tool for obtaining dominance. The problem of absent human freedom is not resolved by any form of force.

...and? the prisons ...
By: nanasevenheaven. on 11 Apr 12, 19:02:06
...and? the prisons are rapidly becoming privatized too - the USA now has more people imprisoned, per capita, that ANY other country in the world, again, once a prison becomes a for-profit to stockholders venture, in order to maintain profitability, they must imprison as many people as possible and keep them for as long as possible. Hence the continued "war on drugs..." OUR tax dollars still pay to maintain them, so no savings to us - they now cost more than ever. Got to make $

It was because they ...
By: nanasevenheaven. on 11 Apr 12, 18:56:25
It was because they were refusing to allow actual health care to those who paid for it that the? need for government to step in and start regulating what they were doing became necessary. It was the birth of the "HMO" that killed actual healthcare - the "M" being MANAGED - by the corporations that wanted profit more than they wanted healthy people. It was theft on a grand scale - "death panels" exist - they are called HMO executives.

It wasn't until the ...
By: nanasevenheaven. on 11 Apr 12, 18:50:22
It wasn't until the capitalists noticed that huge pool of money sitting there, that they got greedy and decided that it should be made a FOR PROFIT TO STOCKHOLDERS? industry - the money then went into the stockholders pockets and only by denying care to those who needed it (and paid for it) could they maintain their profits.

diniacea - you are ...
By: nanasevenheaven. on 11 Apr 12, 18:50:05
diniacea - you are so very wrong, it was NOT the government that destroyed healthcare in this country, it was capitalism that did. When? healthcare first started and was the best in the world, it was, well, I guess you could call it a socialist model - those who wanted it (and most employers/unions offered it) all paid into a pool that was there for you to draw from as needed.

When Chomsky said ...
By: daniacea. on 09 Apr 12, 19:39:00
When Chomsky said that free market capitalism cannot satisfy our needs he was completely wrong. America had the best healthcare? in the World when it had a open system which was free of government regulation. It is government regulation, licensing and restrictions which has caused the great increase in cost, thus putting it out of reach of the poor. I am more weary of government oppression than corporate oppression because government oppression is backed by force with guns and prisons.

Did Marxism make so ...
By: 32peartree. on 05 Apr 12, 17:29:31
Did Marxism make so many mistakes - I'm not so sure, after all it was set up to help lessen the burden on? the backs of the poor - and by and large it achieved this. In every country where communism has collapsed the living conditions of the working class have degenerated. Sure the bourgeois thought communism was a mistake - but they would - wouldn't they?

whatever you want ...
By: wcropp1. on 25 Mar 12, 13:02:39
whatever you want to call them. Voluntary, non-statist solutions are obviously ideal, but may not be inadequate? in the context of a capitalist economic system. I suppose the solution is to be practical and flexible, while also making sure not to undermine individual freedom in your attempts to remedy "capitalist injustice," the tragic mistakes many Marxists made. The state is certainly a tool you can use to effect change, but a dangerous one you must use reluctantly, at your own risk.

protection for the ...
By: wcropp1. on 25 Mar 12, 12:58:30
protection for the wealthy," and doesn't really like the coercive nature of the state, but the socialist in me can understand how a capitalist system can produce tremendous? inequalities/poverty/suffering that may require state action to remedy. Voluntary mutual aid is great, but when the a majority of a nation's wealth is owned by a tiny fraction of the population, there's only so much voluntary mutual aid can do, and rich people have no incentive to participate in these "friendly societies," or

Regardless, I think ...
By: wcropp1. on 25 Mar 12, 12:55:17
Regardless, I think tactics is at the core of this argument--Marxism vs. anarchism, positive vs. negative liberty--are we better off fighting over the state, or smashing it? And "smashing" the state doesn't necessarily have to mean complete revolution or nothing--you can challenge state powers, laws, etc. in a more "reformist" way. Should we focus our efforts on limiting state protection for the wealthy? Or establishing social programs? for the poor? The libertarian in me says "get rid of state

therefore that ...
By: wcropp1. on 25 Mar 12, 12:44:49
therefore that simply undermining the state is not sufficient--that you cannot speak of ending the state until we are also on the verge of a socialist revolution, or apparently have brought about a pseudo-socialist system via government decree. That's an interesting tactical question to ponder, and I'm not sure whether I agree with him or not, but the prospect of state socialism? worries me in some ways. Then again, so does ending the state in a capitalist society.

well spent limiting ...
By: wcropp1. on 25 Mar 12, 12:40:54
well spent limiting the elite's ability to utilize the state, which would be more beneficial by undermining capitalists *and*? the state, rather than fighting for some kind of socialist state, which undermines the wealthy while increasing state power. Perhaps Chomsky does not see ending the state as being enough to significantly alter the economic system (as a market anarchist would argue), and thinks that the state is only one of many means utilized by the bourgeoisie to control the workers, and

Keynesian Cross
Posted by: khanacademy

Video duration: 560 seconds
Global video hits: 4634

Analyzing planned expenditures versus actual output using the Keynesian Cross

Related: macroeconomics, keynes

Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment

Latest comments made on this video:

o it was you.? o ...
By: ymkamara420. on 14 May 12, 18:13:00
o it was you.? o well. i love how u ignored the question. u can not name one single place where that dumb ass Austrian theory is? working. you are a joke.

The guy you were ...
By: sonnybrown. on 14 May 12, 17:55:17
The guy you were replying to was me.? You're a very bright guy resorting to name calling aren't you? Good luck in life.

no u fucking ...
By: ymkamara420. on 14 May 12, 17:23:56
no u fucking dumbass. the guy i was replying to said "Austrian Economics! They've been? right time and time again." and u just a video where one's prediction was wrong. now can you name one place where Austrian economics is working in the real world. i can name Germany, Sweden, Norway and Denmark where Keynesian theory is working.

That's funny. Peter ...
By: sonnybrown. on 14 May 12, 17:17:32
That's funny. Peter poors out strait FACTS in that video. "The fed has created a currency crises. It might even hit in 2010. Might hit in 2011. But when the dollar collapses... it will go down 50, 60 or 70 percent." Really? This is? your argument? All these facts he and you think him saying a collapse MIGHT happen in 2010 is proof of error? You're not even looking at gold value, which he trades in dollars then puts right back into gold. Just stop already, Junior. You're embarrassing yourself.

no you tube this "1 ...
By: ymkamara420. on 14 May 12, 17:00:51
no you tube this "1/4/2010 Peter Schiff On Fast Money: Dollar Collapse By 70% In 2010?" and u know was funny peter sells golds and accepts dollars. now think if the dollars was going to fall? and gold is doing so well why the fuck is he trading gold for dollars. Try again Junior

Peter has said ...
By: sonnybrown. on 14 May 12, 16:52:16
Peter has said repeatedly that he doesn't know exactly when the dollar crises will hit, but it will. If you measure the dollar against gold, it definitely has lost much of its market value. The important thing about that is gold is the default market money? throughout history. Try again, Junior.

that is such ...
By: ymkamara420. on 14 May 12, 16:43:30
that is such bullshit. they have not been right every time. example peter schiff said the dollar would fall by 70 percent by 2010. he was so? fucking wrong it not even funny. also Nick Beam and César Uco both predicted the mortgage crises.

dude, you are ...
By: adisamun. on 16 Apr 12, 08:10:33
dude, you are seriously unbelievably brilliant. i have watched all youtube videos relating to this and none of them are explained as perfect as you. I can't thank you enough srsly,? maths, physics and economics. Your making my career come true and i thankyou :)

It doesn't. You? ...
By: sonnybrown. on 11 Apr 12, 00:24:12
It doesn't. You? ended with Take care young man. I'm 34 for the record. Great. Thanks for doing 3 hours of homework for me btw lol

You must not have ...
By: timgeerdes. on 10 Apr 12, 17:00:04
You must not have put a whole lot? of effort into it. I found about 15 articles from Robert Shiller, 1 from Niall Ferguson, and? like 3 or 4 from Dean Baker in less than 3 hours, all before 2008 predicting the collapse of the housing bubble. Wait, why am I trying to guess how young you are again?

lol, how young do ...
By: sonnybrown. on 10 Apr 12, 05:09:24
lol, how young do you think I am? Ok, I'll dig a little harder, though? I've already looked. You still only found the handful I was talking about, however.

I am sorry... as ...
By: timgeerdes. on 10 Apr 12, 04:22:27
I am sorry... as far as you can see? Look a little harder. I would do it for you but unfortunately youtube doesn't let me post links. Besides...? it can never hurt to take the time out to dig a little deeper. Take care young man.

Sorry, but only ...
By: sonnybrown. on 10 Apr 12, 02:57:57
Sorry, but only Lakshman and Ruobini said anything prior to the crash as far as I can see. And to say Austrians are Bearish is putting it mildly. I don't disagree with that. But the core reason for this is the Fed and their control over the money supply and interest rates. These, in the Austrian Schools understandings, are doom for the economy as they are not market driven. Central planning causes more trouble then good in their eyes? because they themselves cause the bubbles.

EVERY Austrian ...
By: timgeerdes. on 08 Apr 12, 20:46:58
EVERY Austrian economist was warning of the bubble because it is written into their worldview to be perpetually bearish, and of course you believe it because their predictions just so happened to coincide with a recession which happens quite literally every 5 to 10 years. And Keynesian economists who? predicted the 2007-08 crash: Nuriel Ruobini (sp?), Nial Furguson, Robert Shiller, Lakshman Achuthan (sp?) just off of the top of my head.

He did fail, but ...
By: michalchik. on 07 Apr 12, 04:14:25
He did fail, but his biggest failing was not keeping interest rates low, it was lobbying for? no regulations on over the counter financial instruments which created a massive feeding frenzy of speculation and market manipulation. I am not saying that the Kenseyians were right on this either. Both schools of thought when used as stand alone ideologies fail. They need to be used judiciously. Ravi Batra, Brooksley Born, Raghuram Rajan and several others not tied to a school did predict the collapse.

Sorry, but you're ...
By: sonnybrown. on 07 Apr 12, 01:23:30
Sorry, but you're completely false in your statement. Show me any one besides Krugman (who barely even got it right). You'd be lucky to find a handful. It's still a general beliefe amongst modern economists who apply Keynesianism to their models that the bubble was an unpredictable condition of the markets. EVERY Austrian? economist was warning of the bubble. ALL of them.

So have a? good ...
By: timgeerdes. on 06 Apr 12, 21:36:40
So have a? good deal of Economists who would consider themselves Keynesian thinkers. The only difference, for the most part, is that the internet (the place where our current generation tends to get vast majority of their information from) chooses to ignore them.

Low rate was set ...
By: mappingtheshit. on 06 Apr 12, 11:27:14
Low rate was set by? Greenspan, one of the most fantical follower of Austrian school...

no it was low ...
By: ajgolfer1. on 06 Apr 12, 09:03:29
no it was low interest? rates

Mercantilism is a ...
By: anryth. on 06 Apr 12, 04:37:07
Mercantilism is a form of protectionism. There is nothing particularly specific about gold in their doctrine it was just that? gold was the most widely used currency at the time. The mercantilists sought for the state to intervene and protect them from their more efficient foreign competitors. Smith and Ricardo latter showed that having more money did not mean more wealth, but instead having more stuff is what gave money its value. Something the Keynesians cannot understand.

Austrians don't ...
By: sonnybrown. on 05 Apr 12, 18:41:20
Austrians don't believe in the Fed controlling interest rates. Every one in the Austrian school went crazy when Greenspan held rates low. "Austrian economists such as Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek largely advocate the idea that malinvestment occurs due to the combination of fractional reserve banking and artificially low interest rates" - from the Wiki. So tell me again how "Austrian Economic principles" caused the bubbles? Why were they the only ones warning about the problem? It was Keynsianism?

Ironically, DotCom ...
By: mappingtheshit. on 05 Apr 12, 17:37:03
Ironically, DotCom bubble? and mortgage crisis happened because of Austrian Economics principles...

I hate keynesian? ...
By: 2leet2cheet. on 05 Apr 12, 17:20:56
I hate keynesian? economics.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Recent Business Videos

Search

Recent Business Sponsors

Partner Sites