>An entire economic system based on the idea that someone

>>2041411
Only regimists and idiots take him seriously.

>>2041411

Pretty sure the theory was to make debts during crisis, and repay those debts when the economy is doing well.

Western goverments started misusing this policy tho by bribing the people to win elections and making debts even during economically good times

>>2041411
Government doesn't incur debt in the same way that you do.

>>2041411
Because Academia is a giant echo chamber

>>2041821
This, but also this: >>2041443.

>>2041411
The problem is there's very little incentive for a politician to enact sane policy (at least in the US). Tax cuts are popular, and increased spending is popular. If a politician ever tried to argue that we should raise taxes in order to pay off the debt or at least lower the deficit, they'd get burned at the stake (or at least bombarded with negative ads). It doesn't help that the world economy is based on government debt.

When is the last time a Congressman or Senator openly argued that we should simultaneously cut spending and raise taxes? Even when the country was economically prosperous? From my recollection, never.

File: 35235235.jpg (9KB, 245x279px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 245x279px

>>2041411
>lol just pay a guy to dig a ditch and fill it up and your economy is fixed

Keynes-tards really are the worst.

>>2044493
>hur dur pick out the most popular thing he said and sum it up in a sentence and declare it shit

Not even a big Keynes fan but you are a retard.

100 dollars says you've never even read him.

>>2041411
Don't bother, this place is filled with statist cucks.

>>2041443
>the economy is doing poorly
>we need to cut taxes
>the economy is doing well
>we need to cut taxes

>>2041443
>>2044491
These, it's political suicide to try and improve the budget situation.

Voters elect parties that promise to bring the budget back to surplus, then revolt when the party they elect cuts spending in order to achieve that. Political parties that campaign on the platform of restoring budget surplus always claim it will be from improved efficiency and avoid talking about the inevitable spending cuts. Opposition parties and media have an easy time swaying public opinion with stories about some regional support centre which will have to close under the heartless new budget.

The only method that works reliably is some kind of economic/resource boom that provides an increase in revenues and doesn't coincide too closely with end-of-election-cycle vote buying.

File: King-Abdullah-II1.jpg (74KB, 444x610px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 444x610px

>>2044506
To be fair, it's pretty hard to implement Keynesianism without a dictator. Voters don't like being told their taxes are going to be raised and their benefits lowered.

File: 20090325-ek36xkmmrrf3d3dhjugtwfdaghrender.png (28KB, 747x495px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 747x495px

>>2041411
>Why does anyone take this guy seriously?

Because the Austrians destroyed all their credibility with years of failed austerity.

>>2041411

The basic idea of Keynesianism is that when the economy is bad, you're supposed to cut taxes and boost government spending to get it rolling again. This creates debt. And then when the economy recovers, you increase taxes and cut spending to pay off the debt.

The problem is that the general public hates the idea of raising taxes, and hates the idea of cutting spending even more. Even suggesting to raise taxes can be political suicide. So the debt never gets paid off. It just keeps growing.

>>2041821
This. Retards literally think public debt is like a personal debt when one day there's gonna be the bailiff knocking at your door and seizing your house.

>>2048170
And this is why democracy is fucking tragic. Politicians only operate with a short term mindset, to get themselves reelected in 4 years. They don't give a fuck what will happen 30 years after the term is over.

>>2048183
There is no system that can protect against stupid.

I made an economics thread earlier and instead of discussing the actual theories put forward, no one actually focused on what the writers wrote about and instead just kind of made shitty posts on nothing at all. Nothing at. All.

I'm not a fan of Austrian economics, I don't even really quite know what that entails, however I have read Von Mises. I am currently reading Irving Fisher and I would like to know more about the incompatibility of their theories on interest and where it stems from.

For instance, Von Mises views interest in this way
(interest rate +/-) ---> (fiduciary media -/+ respectively)
Irving Fisher views interest this way
(reserve-ratio +/-) ---> (interest rate -/+ respectively) ---> (fiduciary media +/- respectively) ---> (reserve ratio -/+) ---> (interest rate +/-)

I mean Fisher seems to use the theory of supply and demand mainly to determine interest rates. Von Mises takes a more realistic look at how the State's interest rates can be perceptibly above or below the natural rate for a prolonged period of time.

>>2048175
What is the Debt ceiling for 200.

Also, it has been stipulated in earlier threads that it is the choice of policy makers to NOT pay off debt on time. This is correct, regardless of the political stance of the president at the time of his presidency we have never been able to actually shrink the debt, it has literally always been growing since time immemorial.

Now it is because of the sinking funds that were developed by England during various wars during the 17th century where this debt growth process originally developed. I was having an argument on reddit once with a person who was like
>debt doesnt always have to grow durrr
And I was like you're right, but practically speaking you're wrong.

>>2048269
>What is the Debt ceiling
Looks like it's you who has no idea what it is.

>>2048278
A mandate to ensure our effective ability to pay off our debts.