It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by airspoon
I'm already doubting what this guy says, as he suggests that we are following Hayek and that some say we should "get back to Keynes", when in fact it is the opposite and we are following Keynesian economics and we should get back to Hayek. Maybe he simply msipoke but it sure didn't sound like it.
“Is all spending equally productive, or should government policies aim to simulate private investment? If the latter, then Mr. Obama is following in FDR’s footsteps and impeding recovery. He does so by demonizing business and creating regime uncertainty through new regulations and costly programs. In this he follows neither Hayek nor Keynes, since creating a lack of confidence is considered destructive by both.”
Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by Kaytagg
Check my first post. In the beginning og the animation, he suggests that we are in a Hayek system and that some say we need to get back to a Keynes model, when in fact we are following Keynes' model and need to get back to Hayek.
Originally posted by airspoon
The mechanics of our economy isn't really up for opinion
Originally posted by airspoon
Either you are following a particular model or you aren't (with variations of course).
Originally posted by airspoon
Our economy is following Keynes' model, not to the down to the book, but certainly more so than Hayek.
Originally posted by airspoon
To suggest that we are in a Hayek economy is absurd, especially seeing how my son has to get permission from government to sell lemonade at a stand on the side of the road.
Originally posted by airspoon
With self regulation, it is the consumer who ultimately regulates the market and it is all or nothing.
Again, we haven't had a whole self regulated market and because people see that deregulating the banks didn't work, it wasn't the self regulated market that could work. All that was, was the government showing favor to the banks, as opposed to allowing the consumer to decide.
If a product is needed, the people will buy it, if it is not needed, people won't. If it is too expensive, someone else can be successful by making a cheaper product. The consumer is going to buy the best value and thus the best value would win, absent any government interference.
If I wanted to sell dish soap, I could lobby the government to prevent any other dish soap company to get to my status and the government can do this through regulation.
If safety is an issue, then people would simply not buy a product that was unsafe, thus allowing someone else to come to market with a better product that is safe. So on and so on.