Hayek vs Keynes

lomiller said:
As with other discussions of this nature, calling the mainstream view of specialists in the field “religious zealots” tends to come from people with unsupportable and usually irrational views of their own they want to support.
Click to expand...

well ok, I am possibly trying to motivate anybody who wants to attempt to defend him a little more. probably the wrong site for that. and I'll be honest, I have zero idea what he would make of today's goings on anyway.

lomiller said:
At the end of the day Keynes is deeply integrated with modern economic though, Hayak, not so much.
Click to expand...

indeed, and some of us think that is entirely the wrong way round.

lomiller said:
Milton Friedman on Hayak and Austrian economics in general:

Economic theory has left Hayak far behind with the real discussions between economists these days isn’t about whether government plays a role but more specific questions of when, where, how and how much.
Click to expand...

and this needs revisiting IMO. I think modern economic theory is lots of voodoo nonsense, and lots of justifying their own jobs.

if you can point out any modern economists (from the non-metals side) that have gotten anything right in the last 10 years, i would be interested to read.

from the top down, Greenspan, the Bernank, Krugman blah blah blah... FAIL.

with systemic failure looming over humans like never before, isnt it about time to abandon the dogma ?
 
Krugman made an accurate prediction of the recent recession as a result of Greenspan's repsonse to the IT bubble as early as... 2001? Slightly different from Schiff and his ilk who apart from predicting the fall of the sky every evening also predicted hyperinflation, etc.
 
TubbaBlubba said:
Krugman made an accurate prediction of the recent recession as a result of Greenspan's repsonse to the IT bubble as early as... 2001? Slightly different from Schiff and his ilk who apart from predicting the fall of the sky every evening also predicted hyperinflation, etc.
Click to expand...

lol, so the last thing he got right was in 2001? :) and because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it wont.

I lost count of the hundreds if not thousands of times I had these conversations with people about the impending collapse of the debt bubble from 02-08.

if you knew how many people have since said "I wish I'd been listening.." since then.
 
kevsta said:
lol, so the last thing he got right was in 2001? :) and because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it wont.

I lost count of the hundreds if not thousands of times I had these conversations with people about the impending collapse of the debt bubble from 02-08.

if you knew how many people have since said "I wish I'd been listening.." since then.
Click to expand...

How many conversations have you had about impending hyperinflation with all the money printing going on? Because a lot of Hayek fans were trembling about hyperinflation while Krugman, etc, were say that there is no chance of it, because of the "Liquidity trap".

And who was right? Krugman.
 
daenku32 said:
How many conversations have you had about impending hyperinflation with all the money printing going on? Because a lot of Hayek fans were trembling about hyperinflation while Krugman, etc, were say that there is no chance of it, because of the "Liquidity trap".

And who was right? Krugman.
Click to expand...

when you say impending, you have to put a date on that. I was having conversations for 6 years ahead of the RE events, this latest round started in 08.

I'm not certain hyperinflation is coming, but it is a possibility IMO. all depends on how the currency wars play out.

what is pretty certain is that financial repression is coming.
 
Last edited:
kevsta said:
lol, so the last thing he got right was in 2001? :) and because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it wont.
Click to expand...

I doubt it, but it's the one example I know off-hand.

Your second sentence shows why a prediction without a reasonable time-frame is useless.

Krugman on the other hand said something like, I paraphrase, "By 2006, the low nominal interest rate result in a housing bubble."
 
kevsta said:
are you saying this is the USA's main problem? the Chinese don't think so.

Will China label USA a Currency Manipulator?

currency wars anyone? it's already well underway.

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/79944740/
Click to expand...

I wasn't even thinking about the USA because China's currency policy impacts the global economy. And I don't necessarily think that's the only problem, the greatest problem, or even a problem. It might be none of the above.

My question was what Keynes or Hayek would have thought "the" problem is. It could be China's currency issues or it could be something altogether different.
 
I doubt the OP understands much, if anything, about Keynesianism or any other body of economics theory.
 
stilicho said:
What is the "this" that is not to be "allowed" in Keynes' writings?
Click to expand...

Racking up large state deficits during a period of economic growth. There are others but if you are going to get that one wrong you might as well not bother.
 
kevsta said:
are you saying this is the USA's main problem? the Chinese don't think so.



Will China label USA a Currency Manipulator?
Click to expand...

The US inflation rate since 2005 doesn’t support the articles you quoted. Conversely it’s very clear that Chinese efforts to keep their currency undervalued have been in spite of economic data rather than because of it.

The ironic part is that while there is a negative effect on the US economy the real looser is ultimately going to be China, which will see major meltdown if they don’t allow their currency to appreciate. In fact it may already be too late.
 
I think the ironic part is Captain Free Market is playing apologist for China’s decidedly non-free currency manipulation.
 
kevsta said:
well ok, I am possibly trying to motivate anybody who wants to attempt to defend him a little more. probably the wrong site for that. and I'll be honest, I have zero idea what he would make of today's goings on anyway.
Click to expand...

You are fundamentally flawed in your approach. If you want people to defend the things Keynes said then tell us which of those things you disagree with.

TBH you seem to be of the notion that whatever Keynes said was wrong even if you don’t know what he actually said. This in turn leads you to conclude other will support Keynes simply because he was Keynes. IOW you view the issue as being for or against Keynes himself regardless of the fact you don’t know what views Keynes held. For the rest of us, there really isn’t anything in that to discuss.


kevsta said:
indeed, and some of us think that is entirely the wrong way round.
Click to expand...

And some people think Evolution is a fraud, what’s your point?

kevsta said:
this needs revisiting IMO. I think modern economic theory is lots of voodoo nonsense,
Click to expand...

Well that explains your position above. Ultimately though, saying the entirety of modern economic though is “voodoo” does nothing other than paint you as a crank.
 
stilicho said:
I wasn't even thinking about the USA because China's currency policy impacts the global economy. And I don't necessarily think that's the only problem, the greatest problem, or even a problem. It might be none of the above.

My question was what Keynes or Hayek would have thought "the" problem is. It could be China's currency issues or it could be something altogether different.
Click to expand...

IMO neither contributed hugely to modern understanding of monetary policy, so you wouldn’t care a great deal about what either of them though. Whether you agree or disagree with them you would be looking at people like Friedman, Krugman and Bernanke for this type of thing.
 
lomiller said:
The US inflation rate since 2005 doesn’t support the articles you quoted. Conversely it’s very clear that Chinese efforts to keep their currency undervalued have been in spite of economic data rather than because of it.

The ironic part is that while there is a negative effect on the US economy the real looser is ultimately going to be China, which will see major meltdown if they don’t allow their currency to appreciate. In fact it may already be too late.
Click to expand...

IMO it is already too late, frankly no-one can keep up with the USA's printing binge of the last 3 years, and to try is economic suicide.

IMO the China bubble is bursting as we speak, and bad as it may be for the Chinese, at least they are already mostly peasants, whereas a proportion of the USA returning to a peasant lifestyle will be WAY more traumatic.

Sceptic-PK said:
I think the ironic part is Captain Free Market is playing apologist for China’s decidedly non-free currency manipulation.
Click to expand...

could you point out the part where I was apologizing for them please?

I simply meant to point out that actually the USA is a massive currency manipulator too, that there is trouble looming here, and that I do not think it will end well. for anybody.

it is also a well know fact in the ROTWOA that Americans don't understand what irony is, so I'll forgive you for this.
 
lomiller said:
IMO neither contributed hugely to modern understanding of monetary policy, so you wouldn’t care a great deal about what either of them though. Whether you agree or disagree with them you would be looking at people like Friedman, Krugman and Bernanke for this type of thing.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought too. No use exhuming a bunch of guys with zero familiarity with the present situation. Isn't that why we keep getting these "reminders" from various eurozone economists that Weimar hyperinflation is about to incinerate everyone? Not only was that an isolated event but its causes--pretty well-known and agreed upon--are nowhere to be found today.

I'm just as interested in understanding what China's leading economists have to say on the subject. How about tossing in a few from India, Indonesia, and some of the more stable African economies?

How about something as simple (from purely the US perspective) as actually competing with Germany and Japan to become the premier auto exporter to China? I have no idea why nobody's thought of that (or maybe they have and I'm just not reading the right magazines).
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
When Hugh Hendry has as much money as Warren Buffett, then I'll listen to him.
Click to expand...

yes because the daft old insider trading crony capitalist is really an expert on China isn't he. :rolleyes:

and what a great deal he got on that fantastic company BOA there too btw, what did he pay, 6.75? (from memory, cant be arsed to read up about him)

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bank-america-fiver-again

so, approximately $1.2 billion down in 8 weeks or something? nice, where do I sign up for lessons from this genius ?

the difference between Hendry and Buffet is that Hendry lives in the real world, and wouldn't get bailed out by his Congress mates if he failed like the muppet you worship.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom