Conservatives Are Wrong About AOC, and AOC Is Wrong About Keynesian Economics

Comments

1

Economics is so fucking spouty. I think more than any other analytic profession, in economics you can be proven dead fucking wrong over and over again and still not lose your job, or even your respect or professional standing. So many really smart people and economics who blather bullshit that never seems to play out, and then seem to see that as a green line to not only continue what they're doing but to swerve out into any other lane they feel like commenting publicly on. Good work if you can get it I guess ....

2

A wonderfully constructed philosophical piece. Beautiful, imo. Thank you.

3

Good Afternoon Charles,
I was reading your post and read ".... confused with neo-Keynesianism (Paul Krugman, Janet Mellen, and so on), …" Did you mean Janet Yellen?

Also, your assertion that Milton Friedman can hardly be called an economist is a bit of a stretch. He did after all, win a Nobel Prize in Economics and basically founded the Chicago School.

4

@1 -- "I think more than any other analytic profession, in economics you can be proven dead fucking wrong over and over again and still not lose your job... "

A minor quibble:
one could be a media pundit / talking head / 'analyst' and never
once get anything right, and you'd still be Welcomed on FOX
where Centrists are outnumbered 4 - 1 and the Socialists are
all Insane...

"A completely different system is needed for problems at the social and world-historical scale: universal housing, universal health care, mass transportation, and the maintenance and protection of vital ecosystems."

Go Bernie.

5

"having is logically prior to having more"
yup, that sums up a whole lot!

6

@1 Economics, still the dismal science.

7

Very nice piece Charles.
Another issue is not merely the desire of "having more" before the basic needs are met, but also of people's desire that their neighbors have less. So many people see it as a zero sum game. Even meeting basic needs, which is certainly not zero sum, is seen as "taking" from the deserving (i.e., a person and his/her immediate family) and "giving" to the undeserving (i.e., all others)

9

@8 -- Right she's a real Dummy
Were AOC 35 years of
age by then she'd be
VP by next January.

10

I think all she did was confuse John Maynard Keynes with the planned community northwest of London.

12

But if I can't make you desire flying and destroying the climate, you might get flight shame and demand America build cheaper and faster high speed trains that don't destroy the climate instead!

And then how would MCC run against AOC?

13

this analysis is missing the inclusion of two things: 1) the reality, and importance, of dynamism, and 2) the every expanding nature of human desire, or "wants", and it's conflation with human needs. without including these, I think this analysis is too simple.