6 ms·

2-b: This is not true, and is a harmful and common fallacy. Keynesian economics is not permanent government spending. It's government spending only in rare ca

2-b: This is not true, and is a harmful and common fallacy. Keynesian economics is not permanent government spending. It's government spending only in rare cases of overall economic depression. In fact, what Keynes would argue is that if a depression occurred, you need government deficit spending to replace the decrease in the overall economy. This has nothing to do with the normal level of government spending in the economy. He didn't advocate digging holes and filling them back up as a normal thing - he advocated it only in rare cases of economic troubles.

pm90 10y ago
> He didn't advocate digging holes and filling them back up as a normal thing - he advocated it only in rare cases of economic troubles. He didn't advocate that even in case of economic troubles. I absolutely agree with the parent. US military spending is one of the major engines that powers the American economy and the American Research University system. Quite contrary to digging ditches and filling them back up, military funding trickles down to fund advanced mathematics, fundamental science and so on: even if indirectly. While its true that economic growth can be achieved without Keynesian economics, it is hard to sustain economic growth and prosperity at levels that the US has managed to do. While its not all because of the Military, they have had a large (although little acknowledged) hand.
- josho 10y ago
  > US military spending is one of the major engines that powers the American economy I always get lost on this argument. Americans largely see socialism as evil (obvious consequence of the cold war). Yet, the argument put forward above is essentially arguing for a special form of socialism that applies only to military contractors.
  - ArkyBeagle 10y ago
    Yep. "To provide for the Common Defense" is in our Conftituion. It may be worth reading a bio of Eisenhower to see just how big a shift the pre-WWII drawdown was to the post-WWII equilibrium ( after a span). America was founded against the idea of a standing army for almost all its history.
  - pm90 10y ago
    It makes sense when you see it from a political viewpoint. Its easier to justify spending money to keep evil at bay, to remain the superpower, for our soldiers etc. Its much harder to convince people that we should be spending more on society, for the poor etc. The rather disappointing results of the "War on Poverty" left many disillusioned with Federal government programs for societal benefits.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> He didn't advocate digging holes and filling them back up as a normal thing Keynes didn't advocate them at all. He did argue that something like that would be simultaneously be better than the nothing that some others advocated as a government response to a recession in the private sector, and worse than actually investing in (e.g.) useful infrastructure. Saying that he advocated digging holes and filling them back up is like saying that a person who says that they'd rather have their arm ripped off than be decapitated is begging to be dismembered.
- tuna-piano 10y ago
  Apologies if I misrepresented him. As you say, he did think digging and filling holes would be good for the economy. And I think for people unfamiliar with his reasoning, that is the example that is most clear of his viewpoint: that deficit spending is good during recessions, regardless of that spending's actual value.
  - Frondo 10y ago
    Just to clarify, because again you're kind of misrepresenting him: digging and filling holes is better than nothing in a depression.

pm90 10y ago

> He didn't advocate digging holes and filling them back up as a normal thing - he advocated it only in rare cases of economic troubles. He didn't advocate that even in case of economic troubles. I absolutely agree with the parent. US military spending is one of the major engines that powers the American economy and the American Research University system. Quite contrary to digging ditches and filling them back up, military funding trickles down to fund advanced mathematics, fundamental science and so on: even if indirectly. While its true that economic growth can be achieved without Keynesian economics, it is hard to sustain economic growth and prosperity at levels that the US has managed to do. While its not all because of the Military, they have had a large (although little acknowledged) hand.

josho 10y ago
> US military spending is one of the major engines that powers the American economy I always get lost on this argument. Americans largely see socialism as evil (obvious consequence of the cold war). Yet, the argument put forward above is essentially arguing for a special form of socialism that applies only to military contractors.
- ArkyBeagle 10y ago
  Yep. "To provide for the Common Defense" is in our Conftituion. It may be worth reading a bio of Eisenhower to see just how big a shift the pre-WWII drawdown was to the post-WWII equilibrium ( after a span). America was founded against the idea of a standing army for almost all its history.
- pm90 10y ago
  It makes sense when you see it from a political viewpoint. Its easier to justify spending money to keep evil at bay, to remain the superpower, for our soldiers etc. Its much harder to convince people that we should be spending more on society, for the poor etc. The rather disappointing results of the "War on Poverty" left many disillusioned with Federal government programs for societal benefits.

dragonwriter 10y ago

> He didn't advocate digging holes and filling them back up as a normal thing Keynes didn't advocate them at all. He did argue that something like that would be simultaneously be better than the nothing that some others advocated as a government response to a recession in the private sector, and worse than actually investing in (e.g.) useful infrastructure. Saying that he advocated digging holes and filling them back up is like saying that a person who says that they'd rather have their arm ripped off than be decapitated is begging to be dismembered.

tuna-piano 10y ago
Apologies if I misrepresented him. As you say, he did think digging and filling holes would be good for the economy. And I think for people unfamiliar with his reasoning, that is the example that is most clear of his viewpoint: that deficit spending is good during recessions, regardless of that spending's actual value.
- Frondo 10y ago
  Just to clarify, because again you're kind of misrepresenting him: digging and filling holes is better than nothing in a depression.