4 ms·
As far as I understand it, Keynes's broad point was that even the straw man of creating jobs just to create jobs is better than the alternative of rampant unemp
by knowtheory 15y ago
As far as I understand it, Keynes's broad point was that even the straw man of creating jobs just to create jobs is better than the alternative of rampant unemployment (where people rely on charity and public works, and still don't contribute to GDP).
That said Keynes's primary point was that governments should invest and spend money wisely to do stuff the private sector can't or won't do.
======================================
You and I can agree that we'd love to live in a world where people pursue employment due to interest and/or a drive to make the world/economy better. That's not the world we live in, and I don't know how we get there from here.
Lastly, markets are manipulable and are manipulated, and governments aren't the only actors doing so.
- cma 15y agoThis assumes that the downsides of labor (monotony, debilitating or fatal injury (particularly in the case of much-touted "shovel-ready" projects)) don't count. If the end product of the artificial jobs minus those downsides provides less individual and social utility than simply paying the worker a stipend, we should go with the stipend and forget the work.
- davidw 15y agoThere are probably some psychological benefits to doing something, even if it's only building trails in the forest or things like Timberline Lodge or various endeavors like that. Probably best to study it though, rather than simply conjecture.
- krschultz 15y agoYou are vastly over-estimating injuries on construction projects. They happen, but not like it was 1920 or 1850 or 2000 BC.
- cma 15y agoFair enough, but I'll assume (based on your omission) that you are vastly underestimating the downsides of monotony.
- lsc 15y agoI think that most people would prefer a job doing something they feel is useful. Heck, I'd take some moderate risks to feel like I was earning my keep. I think this is why most public assistance programs in America have been tied to 'service' of one kind or another. It's why social security is at least partly tied to your taxes while you were working. We've got our pride; and yeah, I agree it's irrational, but that's just the way many of us are. Actually, I got one of those hiring bonuses last year; I mean, I didn't know that I'd get it, and it was only a few hundred dollars, so it didn't factor in to the hiring decision, but I did make someone an actual employee, and my accountant told me I got a credit for it. (The guy was a contractor before, but he did get a substantial raise, and a steady salary rather than a varying paycheck based on hours worked.)
- CWuestefeld 15y agowe'd love to live in a world where people pursue employment due to interest and/or a drive to make the world/economy better We do, and in fact it is necessarily so. See "Invisible Hand": (the following is a quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand ) the invisible hand was created by the conjunction of the forces of self-interest, competition, and supply and demand, which he noted as being capable of allocating resources in society. This is the founding justification for the Austrian laissez-faire economic philosophy, but is also frequently seen in neoclassical and Keynesian economics. The central disagreement between economic ideologies is, in a sense, a disagreement about how powerful the "invisible hand" is.
- dhume 15y agoThat's an emergent property of the system as a whole, not the desire of the typical participant, and it is not based on any motivation for working beyond desire to collect a paycheck.
- CWuestefeld 15y agoYou're absolutely correct about that. But the end, aggregate effect is indistinguishable from the desired state.
- rgraham 15y agoKeynes wanted governments to save in good times so that they could spend in bad times. We just spend more all the time. It can't work.