Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
PM to Ozone
Comments
-
I don't GAF what a German chancellor who served less than 2 years in office thought.
Using cash infusions to stimulate demand is pure Keynes. Tell me that it isn't.
Where is the Ludwig Erhard stamp?
If you don't like Keynes that's your prerogative, but you're swimming against the current of serious economic scholarship. The only reason fresh-water economists have any support is the subsidies thrown their way by right-wing wingnut welfare (oh, the irony!)
Economic historians J. Bradford DeLong and Barry Eichengreen call [the Marshall Plan] "history's most successful structural adjustment program."
But yeah, keep pretending that it wasn't in line with Keynesian theory.
-
Like I said before...keep spewing things factually incorrect and incredibly stupid and patting yourself on the back for it...why let reality conflict with the theory in your head.AZDuck said:I don't GAF what a German chancellor who served less than 2 years in office thought.
BTW...he didn't live in a vacuum before becoming chancellor. And go read something other than Ludlum...you might actually learn something.
-
Bro, do you even Brad DeLong?
(econ prof at Berkeley) -
Why a fine lib like JFK. Should have been a certain idiotic lib like a certain one I have to deal with daily. That at least would make fiscal sense
-
The fuck is a Keynesian? Is that the twat muscle?
-
Swaye said:
The fuck is a Keynesian? Is that the twat muscle?
-
What, according to his own words?AZDuck said:Bro, do you even Brad DeLong?
(econ prof at Berkeley)
http://www.nber.org/papers/w3899
"We examine the economic effects of the Marshall Plan, and find that it was not large enough to have significantly accelerated recovery by financing investment , aiding the reconstruction of damaged infrastructure, or easing commodity bottlenecks. We argue, however, that the Marshall Plan did play a major role in setting the stage for post-World War II Western Europe's rapid growth. The conditions attached to Marshall Plan aid pushed European political economy in a direction that left its post World War II "mixed economies" with more "market" and less "controls" in the mix. "
I.e. the guy you cited said it was "history's most successful structural adjustment program." by changing from a centrally planned economy to market economy (which is where Ludwig Erhard comes in) and not by throwing money at the problem.
Like I said, keep speaking in cliches without having a clue as to what you are talking about...maybe you just don't understand Keynesian...I'm not sure...but you are really out in left field on this one. -
His words is your source?HoustonHusky said:
What, according to his own words?AZDuck said:Bro, do you even Brad DeLong?
(econ prof at Berkeley)
http://www.nber.org/papers/w3899
"We examine the economic effects of the Marshall Plan, and find that it was not large enough to have significantly accelerated recovery by financing investment , aiding the reconstruction of damaged infrastructure, or easing commodity bottlenecks. We argue, however, that the Marshall Plan did play a major role in setting the stage for post-World War II Western Europe's rapid growth. The conditions attached to Marshall Plan aid pushed European political economy in a direction that left its post World War II "mixed economies" with more "market" and less "controls" in the mix. "
I.e. the guy you cited said it was "history's most successful structural adjustment program." by changing from a centrally planned economy to market economy (which is where Ludwig Erhard comes in) and not by throwing money at the problem.
Like I said, keep speaking in cliches without having a clue as to what you are talking about...maybe you just don't understand Keynesian...I'm not sure...but you are really out in left field on this one. -
I think you think that I am opposed to the free market. Not the case.
-
I think you made a really dumb claim about Keynesian economics, the Marshall Plan, and somehow saying that the Marshall Plan somehow validated Keynesian economics.
I also think you are just deflecting now.




