Which economic duo has the better theory?

[Liberty]

Keynes/Krugman

Vs.

Hazlitt/Sowell

Begin!

 

[william the wie]

Just because the Keynesian model is crap, particularly in the long run, does not mean that the Austrian school is right or even that it is necessarily the most libertarian of economic systems. Next time you get interest from a money market read the prospectus, your demand deposit is being lent out at interest with your consent. That is free market money creation. My bank, credit union and brokerage accounts all continuously send me loan offers and make no bones about where the money comes from i. e. from demand accounts like mine.

The fiction that fraud is involved in fractional reserve banking is a big Austrian school error. The lending offices are in the same building as the tellers and the ATM so those who do not believe that babies come from the cabbage patch know what's going on and have plenty of alternatives to this situation. Precious metal bullion, electronic gold transfer and gold or silver coins are all available to anyone who wants them but get you what you pay for. Exchanging one nanny state for another is not an easy sale.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Krugman is a very bright shill, flack, sellout, whore.

 

[sparky]

Economic model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

one could poke holes to throw cows through any one of these....

 

[Sallow]

Krugman is a very bright shill, flack, sellout, whore.

Please..don't hold back.

 

[Sallow]

Economic model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

one could poke holes to throw cows through any one of these....

Models work as templates. Real life economics is extremely fluid and can change on a dime.

 

[uscitizen]

None of the above.

 

[editec]

Whomsoever believes that there is one path, and only one direction into which we must guide our marco-economy to keep it vibrant and functional is missing the mark.

Contrary to what apparently many of you believe, neither Keynes nor Krugman takes that idealistic position.

As to whether Hazlitt / Sowell are taking such a foolish position, I cannot say.

 

[william the wie]

Whomsoever believes that there is one path, and only one direction into which we must guide our marco-economy to keep it vibrant and functional is missing the mark.

Contrary to what apparently many of you believe, neither Keynes nor Krugman takes that idealistic position.

As to whether Hazlitt / Sowell are taking such a foolish position, I cannot say.

Worse than that the Keynes/Hicks-Hanson model deals solely with the Income statement while the Austrian model deals solely with the Balance sheet. There is a very good reason why firms get judged on both of those financial statements.

While it is true that Value investing based on balance sheets consistently beats buy and hold when ignoring investment on research while trading based on income statements and cashflow consistently lags buy and hold, the application of these findings to nations does seem doubtful. Corporate raiders generally do not use artillery, gunships and infantry in takeovers but nations do.

Keynesian economics was and is designed to run nations into the ground by hollowing out the balance sheet and has done so throughout the G20 to destroy the European empires of the 19th and 20th centuries. It also does a bang up job of protecting those with inherited wealth. (Keynes was a member of the British establishment who exploited his connections in the British bureaucracy to die rich despite being a crappy trader when deprived of inside information.) But the fact that Keynesian economics is all sophistry designed to help politicians win the next election and bureaucrats advance their careers it does not follow that Austrian economics is the way to go.

 

[Liberty]

glad to see smart people outnumber the dumb on this board 7:1.