Who was in the right here?

>literally mount negro
get out

...

Classic:
youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

Groucho.

Hayek got btfo in the '30s and nobody but neckbeard community college dropout armchair Austrian school idiots take him seriously.

You know what happens if Trump's policies of tariffs and such go into effect? Inflation without making a dent in unemployment. Bank on it. Herbert Hoover 2.0

Keynesian economics won; because that's what the majority of governments use.

The Austrian school literally has NO MONETARY POLICY. So it's a non-competition.

Making cuts in boom time, and releasing money into the system in bust times - is the only way to smooth out economic chaos. That's the nature of Keynesian economics.

There's no contest.

Looks like this thread is over.

I don't think most Trump supporters even know who Hayek is. Nor do I think that Trump would ever actually claim to be a classical liberal.

He's partially correct on his stance on trade. NAFTA is bad. Not because free trade is bad, but because NAFTA is a managed trade agreement with 2500 pages of garbage.

It's not free trade.

But slapping tariffs on every country you feel is engaging in "predatory trading" is asinine.

What are those chinks going to do with dollars? Eat them?

They take the money, buy goods and services, invest it in American markets, or purchase goods such as real estate which they must pay tax on.

Thanks to floating exchange rates and a fiduciary monetary system, trade balances itself. No matter what they do, those USD and Renminbi will eventually end up in their respective markets.

>Look at my info-graph that lacks any kind of perspective on why the markets performed the way they did!
>Nevermind the fact that Keynesian economics lead to the issues that Monetarism attempted to fix, such as "stagflation" which should've been impossible under Keynes' model
>Infograph also leaves out the last 7 years of Keynesian policy, which was the most disastrous period for Keynes theories
Low energy. Sad!

>Cred Forums suddenly likes Keynes

>the only variable between these two periods is that milton friedman released a book!!!
>inflation of the money supply t-t-totally stopped after 1974!!
>p-please leave out most of the 70s...

he he those monetarists sure do love their quantitative easing right goys?

Muh animal spirits

Growth in the "stagflation" of the 70s was still higher than we could've ever dreamed of today.

good times

also

>implying that there have been no power grabs of government and shitty gibme voters policies since 1970 so we should just blame it on phantom monetarism instead

not really a surprise, considering that Cred Forums's hero Hitler was pretty much a proto-Keynesian

The Austrian school of Economics will be the only theory that will get the West out of its current economic malaise. BTW, the "Austrian School" is red pilled as fuck, get rid of central banks etc

Is the red graph real GDP growth? If it is, you confirmed that I said.

Are you referring to the world in general? Or to the US in particular? Because the UK has been much more socialist before (!) 1980 than today.

The simple fact is, that for all its faults, Keynesianism just works and that's the reason why it's taught in the world's premier economics programs such as the Univeristy of Chicago and the London School of Economics

You would also be hard-pressed to find an economic advisor to a head of state who isn't a Keynesian

Austrian economics is a farce

It has no mathematical backing and relies solely on philosophy

2008? thats what you call "it just works"?

who's /chicago/?

because there is not 2 universes, identical in every way except economic policy

If you cant make falsifiable claims, you can't be scientific.

guess who is claiming to be scientific?

his son is much better

youtube.com/watch?v=DpkaLW0Jxd0

Interventionism is a farce

How long are you going to stimulate growth, before you realize that bad businesses have to fail?
Do you realize that countries have limited instruments? We are already at Negative Interest rates *globally*, what is after that?
Running on debt isn't that profitable either, just look what happened to Argentina or many other countries. When recession hits hard, because country is in huuuge debt it's game over.

Daily reminder that if you support Keynesianism you support the government stealing from the working man by devaluing the currency via the (((central bank))) and (((fractional reserve banking)))

Markets are really worried about interest rates going up, so they're not very fond of the idea of a sudden hike.

But honestly, I have little idea what to do either. The global economy is in a really bad shape.

Money supply increase is a monetarist, not a Keynesian policy, dummy.

Checked and Kek'd!

>literally having this little of an idea and yet talking

You deserve Merkel.

Keynesianism in practice results in inflation as government spends money it doesn't have, and pumps money into the economy. Monetarism sought to control inflation by controlling the federal reserve and failed. What does Monetarism have to do with this thread, Hayek wasn't a monetarist

>government spends money it doesn't have
How's that supposed to work?

>that 7 year gap
kraut bro stop posting pls

So controlling the monetary supply isn't monetarist policy?

Deficit spending and almost 20 trillion in debt.

During the era of Keynesianism the government debts around the world were actually negligible.

>Before keynesianism was widespread government debts were negligible

See the decline between 1947 and 1980? That's been dubbed the era of Keynesianism.

Hayek is pretty common as is Friedman. I'd switch Trump out with HIllary supporters as most of them are low class low income low information partisans.

That was also all before the government completely controlled every aspect of the currency. Now it's meaningless.

>Era of Keynesianism
>After the Great Depression
>After the New Deal
>After WWII
You fucking wish.

Aren't you confusing something? You had the gold standard (control) and today you have Fiat money (free floating).

>keynes vs hayek
>not milton friedman

wew Cred Forums

My wish came true, it seems. 1947-1980 was the era of Keynes.

good luck explaining why the fuck the recession just ended after the war (when the spending ceased) and why it stayed on so long even though keynes was applied to almost the entirety of it.

good luck using keynes to explain stagflation scenarios too.

:)

The gold standard was axed during Nixon. The 70's by and large are partly responsible for today's climate. It's not an all at once thing but something that was started here and there and linearly ramped up to create what is so broken today.

Trump very mild "protectionism" is really secondary compared to his trolling the Federal Reserve.
Truth is, Trump is the only candidate that would at least pretend to oppose the coming helicopter money.

That debt spike looks an awful lot like a bunch war debts. The government (s) of the day were forced into debts with war bonds and the like as a means of survival. You cant fight ww2 with out debt, and you cant pay that off instantly. Not to mention the cold war no doubt produced vast debts of their own, supasekrit nukes arent exactly a resellable commodity.

Yes, but you said that government recently took control over the currency.

That's the opposite of what happened. With the abandonment of the gold standard, the government gave away control of itd currency.

The recession ended in the 1940s, because there was lots upon lots of demand for American goods abroad.

The Americans literally have NO GULAG POLICY. So it's a non-competition.

youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

Hayek won according to this

"ended". a peak in overseas demand doesn't mean an economy is not fucked up.

technically not in a recession, but still was in dire shit.

Dont know who either of them is. I choose the guy that doesnt have monkey lips.

Yeah senpai let's ignore Keynes actually advising FDR to create work programs in the early 30s by borrowing money, let's ignore the fact that Keynesians were crying that the end of WWII would destroy the economy. What era are we in now? Where the government has counterfeited two trillion dollars to try and offset the recession, where unemployment refuses to drop even when we follow keynesianism, where we continue deficit spending with fiat money, and where the feds fund rate is lower than 1%.

That's not why I put up the graph. I know WW2 created debt. Look at the period before the federal reserve was created (1915).

1940 was the fastest economic recovery in history.

The 70's are pretty recent at least for me. I'm not sure what you mean by giving up control. The government only requires tax livestock so it can borrow whatever it wants. It's part and parcel why everything is subsidized by them science education healthcare etc.

Obama's government spending increase was very restrictive in comparison to previous ones.

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-28/government-austerity-exacts-toll-on-u-s-jobs-wages-and-growth

That's the opposite of Keynesianism.

You said that the government began to control the currency.

>Forced conscription
>As evidence of economic success in creating employment
Holy shit

>unemployement
>not gdp

i see what u did there

all-out war always causes full employment, retard
you make everyone enlist in the fucking army, so everyone counts as employed. at the same time everyone had to ration every other resource.

it's like making half of the country dig up holes and the other half fill them, you make everyone have jobs but no one fucking do anything valuable.

It didn't begin in the 70's. I mentioned that things don't and didn't happen all at once but that changes happen linearly over time to lead up to how things are now. You can walk back every decade and see it all unravel. Anyways as for a start point I've read some put their finger on certain events in the 20's and even the 30's.

bro do you even war? They sent their workforce overseas to fight a bloody war and on their return they started creating higher education facilities to make people do something other than seeking a job.

You can look at GDP graphs or average wage graphs and see the same development.

I ain't gonna dig them up for you.

anyhow, gdp was boosted on the war due to massive government spending.
government spending =/= real output

In 1990's Japan became Keynesian paradise. See for yourself.

1940 wasn't a recovery. The USA didn't recover until after the war and all the regulatory agencies were dismantled. It was freedom for entrepreneurs and workers (GI's). FDR was a horrible president and did quite a bit to destroy property rights. He actually made things worse with his New Deal. It delayed our recovery. The New Deal was even racist as he didn't want blacks to benefit from it despite selling them on it. FDR was a fool with good intentions. Government meddling with the market increasingly so just magnifies harm done by human error or corruption.

Free trade with countries that do not engage in currency manipulation (ie deliberately setting the international exchange rate higher or lower then the currency's actual value) is a good thing, but if a country engages in currency manipulation of that fashion I am of the opinion that a tariff is necessary. This is covered in Capitalism And Freedom by Milton Friedman, though Freidman disagrees with my conclusion in this case.

mfw ECB devalued the euro so hard, exports went through the roof and nobody said a thing.
That's what white privilege is all about son.

you're more likely to hurt yourself by doing that desu.

it's more effective to let them do that, because they're impoverishing their own people.

also, interests rates manipulate currency value. americans forget that their 0% interest rates fucked up every single emerging market by exporting inflation to them.

Japan still hasn't recovered from the 80's. They're still the victim of the interventionists and micromanagers. It's surprising that politicians are still turning to turning to Keynesian and socialist interventionism to address problems caused by these same Keynesians and socialists. Japanese corporations are nothing more than welfare queens.

>government spending =/= real output
If you define it like that, you'll guaranteed to win every argument against government spending. Congratulations.

So I assume the GDP of Germany is 55% of what it is claimed to be?

>1940 wasn't a recovery

just sayin' that not every investment the government does is rational and produce what people demand. keynes was wrong on that.

shit son

yeah, you're right I guess.

There was actually a contraction in the economy by then. I'm not sure what that proves besides the workforce being armed to fight Europe's war.

The government mostly does literally what people demand. In a democracy, at least.

Strange contraction that is that creates numerous jobs and spurred growth. Wish we had these contractions more often.

Keynes, bisexual masterrace.

except with immigrants :^)

What about those that are against such policies. It would be rare for a 100% approval for such things anywhere.

Mackerel fucked up on that, so she lost lots of votes to the AfD.

The problem is that elections happen only every four years.

Democracy never required a 100% consensus. Every President ever elected in the US was opposed by 30-50% of the population.

Contractions were in the 30's. The illusion of wartime prosperity is rooted partly in how national income was calculated and partly in how the statistics were compiled. Gross Domestic Product, one measure of a country's output, is defined as the sum of consumption expenditure, investment expenditure, government expenditure, and net exports. How do we assess something not traded in markets? In the national-income accounting they are valued at cost, but at best this only tells us what those resources could have earned in alternative lines of production. The costs don't indicate the value of what the government has produced. This problem was compounded by price controls before and during World War II official prices simply did not reflect the true cost of the war. If we are going to have meaningful economic calculation, we need real market prices. Price controls and similar interventions introduce arbitrariness and uncertainty. Procurement at below-market prices is a way to mask the cost of any endeavor. Consider the draft, which forces people into military service at wages below what they would earn on the unhampered market. The amount spent on wages and board for conscripts is an underestimate of the real cost of maintaining the force.

It's even closer these days 51-52% to 40-49%

-Checked- XYZ4 -Montenegro-

F A Hayek was right with his Austrian perspective. Keynes turned the world into cucks by creating tools of government incentive and ease of access for politicians to be swayed by corporate lobbyists.

Secondly Keynes is allegedly a faggot and that instantly disqualifies him.

-Checked- XYZ4 -Poland-

no its not you German fucking shill. Germans shill hard for welfare economics. Such a disgusting cucked nation.

What I am trying to get at is that the government can never fully satisfy the demands of the people on various levels and could possibly disenfranchise 30% of the country.

These are people, not statistics.

Triggered? Go read a book.

People not being statistics is the very reason government provides basic services for the elderly, unemployed and children.

>Cred Forums
>knowing anything about economics
Pick one

You're going a reaaaally long way to argue against what is universally perceived as a "post-War boom". The very same era of manufacturing boom is what Trump is spreading nostalgia for.