You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Keynesian (Fake) Economics”.
« Previous Post Mitt RomneyCare = ObamaCare
Right-Wing Links (March 17, 2010) Next Post »
What say you?
A very shoddy argument. The repetition of the phrase 'vulgar Keynesian' illuminates nothng and is, well, vulgar.
It is not clear for the above that you have atually read the General Theory, certainly not that you have understood it.
The idea that Keynes was unaware of the interrelationships between the sectors of the economy is a laughably poor one. The only way any idea of a 'multiplier' can work is if increased activity in one sctor calls forth increased activity in another. That is, if you set up a factory, construction, energy production, busines services etc., etc.will all be deployed in the intermediate levels of production.
I am not a Keynesian, as I think there are separate faults in his analysis. But it is infinitely preferable to this schoolboy attempt to rubbish his ideas.