Re: Why nobody listens to Keynesians

[Paul Henry Rosenberg <rad@xxxxxxx>]

Harry Veeder wrote:

> > >Harry Veeder:
> > > I feel Keynesian economic philosophly is inappropriate for those societies
> > > and communities which do not make a strong positive link between social
> > > comfort and the acquisition and display of positional status goods. Or to
> > > put it another way,  Keynesian economic policy enjoys popular support
> > > among those cultures where a significant fraction of social esteem is
> > > dependent on the acquisition and display of positional goods. The current
> > > unpopularity of Keynesianism is due, in part, to a general shift in social
> > > values which make the pursuit, possession and therefore production of such
> > > positional goods less necessary for an individual to feel "social comfort."
>
> Paul Rosenberg:
>
> > So, Keynes is unpopular now because we're so much less materialistic and
> > status-conscious than we were in the 60s or the the 30s???
> >
> > Nice try! <G>
>
> Harry Veeder:
>
> Let me try again. I didn't say we were less status-conscious. I was
> trying say that in terms of one's social status, positional goods play a
> less important role then they once did. What exactly are you
> disputing?

I'm disputing what you just said, obviously.

Status conscious + materialistic ====> increased role for positional
goods.

Put it like this, Harry, the bumper stickers in the 60s said "Make Love,
Not War", they did *NOT* say "He who dies with the most toys wins" like
they do today.

Beyond that, what can I say?  If you have to have the evidence explained
to you, you'll never understand.

>I only suggested this might be one factor contributing to the
> unpopularity of Keynesianism.

If the premise were true, which it isn't.  The converse is true.  Which
suggests that you're whole line of reasoning is kerflempt.


--
Paul Rosenberg
Reason and Democracy
rad@xxxxxxx

"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"