Comments on: John Maynard who? (part 2) http://www.randelltiongson.com/john-maynard-who-part-2/ Life and Personal Finance Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:41:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bon-Gonna Li http://www.randelltiongson.com/john-maynard-who-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1060 Bon-Gonna Li Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:14:01 +0000 http://www.randelltiongson.com/?p=529#comment-1060 The hazards of central economic planning, which is basically what's being done to implement Keynesian ideas, has not been successful. The good intention of smoothing out the economic cycles through periodic monetary expansion and spending leads to abuse, as we have seen. A free-market economy is better. But the government should be there for some minimum intervention to ensure order, peace and fair play. The hazards of central economic planning, which is basically what’s being done to implement Keynesian ideas, has not been successful. The good intention of smoothing out the economic cycles through periodic monetary expansion and spending leads to abuse, as we have seen.

A free-market economy is better. But the government should be there for some minimum intervention to ensure order, peace and fair play.

]]> By: Bon-Gonna Li http://www.randelltiongson.com/john-maynard-who-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1030 Bon-Gonna Li Sun, 10 Jan 2010 07:40:49 +0000 http://www.randelltiongson.com/?p=529#comment-1030 There's a big debate on how much the government should involve itself in the economy. Should it be a total government or no government? Or something in between. Political science and economics are two good areas to study for a serious investor. They are intertwined. There's a third area, of course. The YouTube presentation might be an interesting one to view. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0 Bon-Gonna Li There’s a big debate on how much the government should involve itself in the economy. Should it be a total government or no government? Or something in between. Political science and economics are two good areas to study for a serious investor. They are intertwined. There’s a third area, of course.

The YouTube presentation might be an interesting one to view. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0

Bon-Gonna Li

]]> By: Elevic Pernis http://www.randelltiongson.com/john-maynard-who-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-978 Elevic Pernis Mon, 04 Jan 2010 10:46:22 +0000 http://www.randelltiongson.com/?p=529#comment-978 Keynesianism also advocates the so-called "paradox of thrift," i.e. the more people save, the worse the economy becomes. This is reflected in the view of this CNBC article "Higher Savings Rate Is Great, But What About the Economy?" http://www.cnbc.com/id/31567708 The recession, according to Keynes, is caused by a "savings glut," i.e. excessive savings: this is where the government is supposed to intervene. Gov't interventionism is supposed to prop up consumption. Prosperity in the Keynesian framework depends on more consumption. But this is absurd, right? Adam Smith was right when he told to the effect that if prudence is good for the individual, it is also good for society. Keynesianism also advocates the so-called “paradox of thrift,” i.e. the more people save, the worse the economy becomes. This is reflected in the view of this CNBC article “Higher Savings Rate Is Great, But What About the Economy?”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/31567708

The recession, according to Keynes, is caused by a “savings glut,” i.e. excessive savings: this is where the government is supposed to intervene. Gov’t interventionism is supposed to prop up consumption. Prosperity in the Keynesian framework depends on more consumption. But this is absurd, right? Adam Smith was right when he told to the effect that if prudence is good for the individual, it is also good for society.

]]>