3 ms·

Keynes proposed to let people dig holes and let these be filled by again by people. Basically, the ultimate description of a bullshit job. Keynes proposed thi

by mo_42 3y ago

Keynes proposed to let people dig holes and let these be filled by again by people. Basically, the ultimate description of a bullshit job. Keynes proposed this as a counter measure against a depression. I'm absolutely certain that he understood that it does not make society any richer. So for an economist, bullshit jobs are especially bad because they think about what people could be doing instead. Basically, bullshit jobs come at an opportunity cost. Governments should be fighting this phenomenon. Just thinking about creating jobs is a bit shortsighted.

pydry 3y ago
Keynes never actually suggested doing that. He merely said it would be sufficient to escape from a liquidity trap. He advocated for productive work to escape them - like the US did by for example building the Lincoln tunnel. If he were around today to see e-digging holes and filling them up - bitcoin - he'd be horrified.
coolhand2120 3y ago
I would argue Keynesian economists are bullshit but not the entire astrological field of economics.
- mo_42 3y ago
  And what would be your exact argument for that?
  - coolhand2120 3y ago
    The main predictions and suggestions mentioned in the article is a good starting point. I’m not sure what endeavor is the best for human labor but digging and filling the same ditch is not it. You would be hard pressed to convince me that anyone making such suggestions should be taken seriously. Much of our “money isn’t real” monetary policy is thanks to this thinking. There are alternatives that don’t require you to believe in silly things like the example above. Check out Thomas Sowell: Basic Economics.
    - imtringued 3y ago
      >You would be hard pressed to convince me that anyone making such suggestions should be taken seriously. You aren't supposed to take Keynesian gold digging as a serious economic policy. It is a commentary about how your actions can be constrained so much that doing anything logical or reasonable becomes impossible because it hurts some special interest group. > Much of our “money isn’t real” monetary policy is thanks to this thinking. No, that started after the death of Keynesian economics. You know, the era of "monetary policy can fix anything"-Friedman. Monetary policy is inefficient so you have to do a lot of it and you can never stop. If you want to take Keynes seriously, you should read a liquidity theory oriented book. https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_THE%20NEUTRAL%20MONEY%20NETWORK_Kurzfassung.pdf https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_THE%2... https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_Structure-of-Money.pdf https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_Struc...
- imtringued 3y ago
  And yet it is still better than doing nothing. The problem is that nobody has introduced a self stabilising market economy so far. No matter what anyone tells you. Capitalism doesn't work without some government intervention. I want to introduce a self stabilising type of liquidity but I am not ready yet to start a company. I am planning on doing something in two years.
zeroonetwothree 3y ago
The actual quote is: "If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is. It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing."

by mo_42 3y ago

pydry 3y ago

Keynes never actually suggested doing that. He merely said it would be sufficient to escape from a liquidity trap. He advocated for productive work to escape them - like the US did by for example building the Lincoln tunnel. If he were around today to see e-digging holes and filling them up - bitcoin - he'd be horrified.

coolhand2120 3y ago

I would argue Keynesian economists are bullshit but not the entire astrological field of economics.

mo_42 3y ago
And what would be your exact argument for that?
- coolhand2120 3y ago
  The main predictions and suggestions mentioned in the article is a good starting point. I’m not sure what endeavor is the best for human labor but digging and filling the same ditch is not it. You would be hard pressed to convince me that anyone making such suggestions should be taken seriously. Much of our “money isn’t real” monetary policy is thanks to this thinking. There are alternatives that don’t require you to believe in silly things like the example above. Check out Thomas Sowell: Basic Economics.
  - imtringued 3y ago
    >You would be hard pressed to convince me that anyone making such suggestions should be taken seriously. You aren't supposed to take Keynesian gold digging as a serious economic policy. It is a commentary about how your actions can be constrained so much that doing anything logical or reasonable becomes impossible because it hurts some special interest group. > Much of our “money isn’t real” monetary policy is thanks to this thinking. No, that started after the death of Keynesian economics. You know, the era of "monetary policy can fix anything"-Friedman. Monetary policy is inefficient so you have to do a lot of it and you can never stop. If you want to take Keynes seriously, you should read a liquidity theory oriented book. https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_THE%20NEUTRAL%20MONEY%20NETWORK_Kurzfassung.pdf https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_THE%2... https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_Structure-of-Money.pdf https://www.dieter-suhr.info/files/luxe/Downloads/Suhr_Struc...
imtringued 3y ago
And yet it is still better than doing nothing. The problem is that nobody has introduced a self stabilising market economy so far. No matter what anyone tells you. Capitalism doesn't work without some government intervention. I want to introduce a self stabilising type of liquidity but I am not ready yet to start a company. I am planning on doing something in two years.

zeroonetwothree 3y ago

The actual quote is: "If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is. It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing."