Why is that socialists don't understand economics?

>>2625350
I'm brazilian and I hate fucking keynesians. Fucking pieces of shit. I wish they would all die.
My god I'll kill myself and my country won't adopt the free market. This fucking country should be first world but because of fucking socialists and communists who follow Lord Keynes. We are FUCKED. oh my god I hate keynes and marx so fucking much

>>2625357
Maybe if you weren't such a fucking retard who can't tell Keynes wasn't a Marxist we'd respect your opinion

>>2625350

>implying Austrians aren't even more of a laughing stock than Marxists among actual economists

The smart socialists are statists and tyrants in disguise

The dumb socialists are idealistic, immature, and naive

>>2625357
>Latin America

There's your problem.

No matter what form of government or economics a Latin American country adopts, it is doomed to remain broken.

>>2625450
Bullshit. In Dictatorship and Monarchy times it grew economically fast as fuck. Please just don't pull things out of your ass.

>>2625448
Go to bed monelenuxuxhx

>>2625471
that's because the latin people are basically peasants, incapable of self governance.

>>2625441
I didn't say Keynes was a marxist. I said Keynesians AND marxists

>>2625475
It was a constitutional monarchy...

>>2625357
But friedman wasn't a keynesian

>>2625476
But Keynesianism has the best track record of any system yet created by humans.

It produced massive economic rallies in the US, in Japan, in South Korea, and now in China.

The lassez-faire cultists managed to kill it during the Arab Oil Crisis, and the west has been in a state of malaise ever since.

>>2625481
ok? doesn't change the fact that south americans are subhumans

>>2625474
not an argument

>>2625486
Chinese are corporatists, not keynesian capitalists.

>>2625475
The problem with Brazil is Portugual used these lands only for resource extraction. They prohibited even construction of roads between the separate lands.
When King João came here things changed. We had one of the most intelligent Kings ever but the aristocracy got angry because the monarchy ended slavery and the army took power without the support of the people. It was so illegitimate that the "first president" hailed the monarchy...

>>2625505
ending slavery isn't necessarily a good thing, because you're introducing into your governance and economy a class of people who were basically animals.

america has the same problem.

I'm not familiar with your situation at all, and I'm kinda drunk

>>2625488
You can call me subhuman but it doesn't hit me because I know what my people were capable of in arts and some other parts of our history. I think "oh this guy is calling me subhuman maybe it's true" but then I remember what our people has achieved artistically and even scientifically and I think "it can't be true..."

the most recent example is the pardo Artur Avila winning the fields medal.

I bet you're an average piece of shit who can't get on the level of the great Heitor villa-lobos

>>2625515
I'm also drunk man.. but I like to read a lot about your country and your country was built under the right ideology. Everything was just right except the slavery aspect. Our country was just a colony made for extraction.
You're country was built from the bottom-up
our country was built from the top-down.

>>2625522
the fact that you're equating 1/10000 exceptions to the rule with the vast majority of the population is troubling.

I'm sure you have a good excuse for why none of the latin american countries approach anywhere near the level of even middling european nations.

excellence in arts and sciences aside, the governance and economies of your countries are shit. always have been. and when your people come to successful countries, they remain peasants, and vote to install statists and welfare-shills

>>2625543
The excuse is that Latin America bought the Soviet Union's ideology. Everytime a president in Latin American followed the free market ideology the country grows. See Chile and Brazil in the Dictatorship times.

Btw our leadership is usually white people. For example the last female who was impeached had a belgian father. Look at our Brazilian presidents and see tehir colors

We're like a poorman's USA.
every region has a different composition of races
the southeast has a lot of italians, arabs etc...
the very south had a lot of germans, polish and italians... Famous example: Gisele Büdchen
we're the country with most japanese people outside of japan (same thing with italians)

>>2625565
I'm no expert by any means, but I feel like the latin american population has little concept of the various economic theories. i feel they view economics in terms of "i'm poor. I know i have countrymen who are rich. i'm going to vote for people who promise to gimme summa dat"

>>2625581
Let me explain to you. Brazil is not like the other Latin American countries. We have a different language and continental proportions. The northeast if very poor in some parts and they need that "gimme dat" because there is a lot of drought and it was a forgotten place. Same thing with the north. So in Brazil there is a division between the north and the south. The South wants more right wing policies. The Northeast wants the party who remembered a little bit about them. This shit gets racial osmetimes because the Northeast was the first place Portugal landed. People are more mixed and everything.

IMO the problem is that Brazil likes to centralize things and regulate a lot. The current president agrees with me and he wants to solve it. Look at our place at the ranking in the countries with the most economic freedom. If we had more economic freedom. I'm fucking sure we would be fucking rich.

If we had REAL federalism like the USA we would be better. The current president has touched on this topic and I hope he can solve it.
Our federalism is fake. The Union gets 54% of everything and then states and cities have to beg for money to the Union.

>>2625604
It sounds like your problems are rooted more in your government than how your economy is run.

Both Keynesian and Neoclassical economics can help make prosperous nations. In Europe and in 1940s-1960s in America Keynesian policies ushered in a fairly long period of growth. Neoclassical economics is more difficult to evaluate, as it has led to incredible gains and incredible losses in the US.

For an example of the mixed track record, in the case of Chile many Keynesian economists say that growth was due to opening up more international markets, and many on the Left criticize the inequality that emerged. Neoclassical economists claim their policies fixed the Chilean economy, while they blame the fact that Chile was a military dictatorship for any hardships the county faced.

>>2625450
Argentina and Venezuela were richer than France per capita in 1950 and for most of the 20th century in general. This is a meme, their failures are recent. Meanwhile Chile, which was much poorer than either of them in 1950, is now close to first world standards.

>>2625350
That's a meme, mainstream economists and Marxists have different priorities and seek to answer different questions.

>>2625565
>Everytime a president in Latin American followed the free market ideology the country grows. See Chile and Brazil in the Dictatorship times.
>Brazil
>free market
Brazil had heavy tariff and non-tariff protection until 1994, it was one of the last countries to adopt neoliberal practices. The economic and financial liberalization happened between 1990-1994, when the tariffs were lowered, the market deregulated, and the inflation was "stabilized". From the late 60's until the late 80's, the economic policy was based on CEPAL's Import substitution industrialization. Especially during the 80's, the heavy protectionism was pretty fucking bad for the industry since it stagnated due to no real competition from the outside, and eventually killed (as is mergers and acquisitions by bigger competitors) a lot of them once the cheap imports and multinational industries started to pour in during the 90's.

For sources (in portuguese), see:
Corseuil, Carlos Henrique; Kume, Honorio (coordenadores). A Abertura Comercial Brasileira nos Anos 1990 : impactos sobre emprego e salário, Rio de Janeiro : IPEA; Brasília : MTE, 2003
Kupfer, David, Política Industrial, Econômica, Rio de Janeiro, v.5,n.2, p.51-89, dezembro 2003
Erber, Fabio Stefano. O Padrão de Desenvolvimento Industrial e Tecnológico e o Futuro da Indústria Brasileira, outubro de 2000

>>2625450
Thanks to american intervention, what a shocker.

>>2625505
Latin America remained medieval-like until fucking late 19th century. Literally any reform would've produced results.

>>2625350
>one strategy optimizes for wealth
>the other strategy optimizes for equality
>lets judge their quality by seeing which one produces more wealth

Alright lad.

>>2625450
Chile did well, Colombia is doing ok now that they finally realized the US really were the good guys all along.

>>2626432
>if we all optimize for ""equality"" we won't be needing any wealth lol
>just let me live in this mud hut, cause everyone else is doing that, too!
Take your time to figure out what went wrong in your line of thinking and to what ludicrous results that would actually lead, please.

>>2626533
>if we optimize for wealth we don't need equality lol
>let me just live in this mud hut like 99.9% of the world and sell my blood plasma for food

>>2625357

socialists and communists don't follow keynes, keynes has had a huge influence on modern mainstream economics

>>2626432

stupid post, modern non-marxian economics has a better understanding of how to reduce inequality or increase growth than marxian

simply because many economists aren't too concerned about a fully egalitarian society doesn't mean their understanding of economics isn't far superior to those who still take marx seriously in an economic context

>>2626574
>i claim you are stupid, because i claim you are wrong

Okay.

>>2626574
Still waiting for the wealth to trickle down over here.

>>2625486

Lol what kind of selective bull shit explanation is that ? Where is the Japanese stimulus getting them? What about stagnant growth with inflation, you revisionist history genius? The growth of was due to the freeing of markets, not low interest rates and the exessive government spending that left whole housing projects empty. Christ

>>2625357
Keynes wasn't socialist or communist lmao.

If you want, i challenge you to a economic debate, but only if, at least, you know something about dialetics and classic economy.

And don't forget to study about kalecki and cambridge controversy if you want to talk about marxist/neoricardian theory