Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Autopsy for the Keyenesians
Wall Street Journal ^ | 12/21/2014 | John Cochrane

Posted on 12/23/2014 12:24:46 AM PST by iowamark

This year the tide changed in the economy. Growth seems finally to be returning. The tide also changed in economic ideas. The brief resurgence of traditional Keynesian ideas is washing away from the world of economic policy.

No government is remotely likely to spend trillions of dollars or euros in the name of “stimulus,” financed by blowout borrowing. The euro is intact: Even the Greeks and Italians, after six years of advice that their problems can be solved with one more devaluation and inflation, are sticking with the euro and addressing—however slowly—structural “supply” problems instead.

U.K. Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne wrote in these pages Dec. 14 that Keynesians wanting more spending and more borrowing “were wrong in the recovery, and they are wrong now.” The land of John Maynard Keynes and Adam Smith is going with Smith.

Why? In part, because even in economics, you can’t be wrong too many times in a row.

Keynesians told us that once interest rates got stuck at or near zero, economies would fall into a deflationary spiral. Deflation would lower demand, causing more deflation, and so on.

It never happened...

Our first big stimulus fell flat, leaving Keynesians to argue that the recession would have been worse otherwise. George Washington’s doctors probably. argued that if they hadn’t bled him, he would have died faster.

With the 2013 sequester, Keynesians warned that reduced spending and the end of 99-week unemployment benefits would drive the economy back to recession. Instead, unemployment came down faster than expected, and growth returned, albeit modestly. The story is similar in the U.K...

(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: economics; johncochrane; keynes; wallstreetjournal; wallstreeturinal
Mr. Cochrane is a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute.
1 posted on 12/23/2014 12:24:47 AM PST by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iowamark
"No government is remotely likely to spend trillions of dollars or euros in the name of 'stimulus,' financed by blowout borrowing"

Kidding right?

2 posted on 12/23/2014 12:32:47 AM PST by Theophilus (Be as prolific as you are pro-life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus
Good point.

Obama's stimulus had no more to do with growing the economy than it had to do is shovel ready jobs, it was a pork ladle to shore up the Democrat party.

The next time the occasion arises, more pork will be ladled and for the same reason.


3 posted on 12/23/2014 12:39:02 AM PST by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
Who can take a sunrise
Sprinkle it with dew
Cover it in chocolate and a miracle or two
The Keyenesian

The Keyenesian can

The Keyenesian can 'cause he mixes it with love and makes the world taste good

4 posted on 12/23/2014 12:45:28 AM PST by clearcarbon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

There is no nation in history that has spent its way out of a failed economy. Just ask the USSR.


5 posted on 12/23/2014 1:07:26 AM PST by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
The whole idea of Keynes economic multipliers never made much sense and even Keynes himself said the multiplier could be zero. The multiplier calculation assumes that all the stimulus will be in the form of consumer spending and is thus based on an inverse of marginal propensity to spend additional income. However, government stimulus tends to buy more government which does not produce more goods or services in a market and takes money away from consumer spending in the form of higher taxes reducing disposable income for consumers.

Obama's massive stimulus was largely used to fund existing government jobs (remember the jobs saved malarkey) and did not create any new consumer spending thus no GDP growth. The massive borrowing used to fund the stimulus crowded out actual investment in the economy. Imagine if the Chinese had invested the billions they spent simply buying our debt into investing in actual businesses in the US economy. The Keynes zombie needs to have a stake in the heart.

6 posted on 12/23/2014 1:08:08 AM PST by The Great RJ (Pants up...Don't loot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clearcarbon

You misspelled the word Kenyanesian,


7 posted on 12/23/2014 1:10:56 AM PST by jonrick46 (The opium of Communists: other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Growth seems finally to be returning.

With all due respect to the nice professor, his brilliant observation is true only if you believe in concocted and contorted economic measurements, manipulated markets, massive amounts of printed money, and the glorious benefits incredible waste and organized theft inherent with central planning.

This article is yet another example of all is well propaganda spewed out by the main stream media. It is similar depth of analysis and accuracy to Andrew Mellon's famous observation in September 1929 that, "There is no cause to worry. The high tide of prosperity will continue." You may recall that one month later, the stock market crashed and the government responded with the same Keynesian garbage that launched the decade long Great Depression ... the same socialist garbage that is wreaking havoc today.

8 posted on 12/23/2014 1:14:07 AM PST by Zakeet (Obama: fail ... deny ... blame ... golf ... distract ... lie ... repeat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46

Synonymous


9 posted on 12/23/2014 1:19:45 AM PST by clearcarbon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nathanbedford

the recession was over in the second quarter of 2009, before the first flaccid stimulus dollar ever hit the economy.


10 posted on 12/23/2014 1:31:30 AM PST by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

“Growth seems finally to be returning.”

Huh? You could have fooled me....


11 posted on 12/23/2014 2:35:25 AM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

The US uses Kenyanesian Economics (which fail too).


12 posted on 12/23/2014 3:06:22 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

The economy is growing. Just not quickly enough. Set your blinders aside.


13 posted on 12/23/2014 3:09:33 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus

There aren’t trillions of dollars available for borrowing. So, where do the “dollars” come from? They’re created out of thin air at the Federal Reserve. Each new dollar steals value from all other old dollars. The Fed then gives the new dollars to their political favorites, who generally like the system, because they get free money. This creates bubbles in the favored industries, in the current case, the Stock Market. Why have Stocks gone up so far and fast over the past year? Have the American Companies been creating wealth to such an extent? Nope.


14 posted on 12/23/2014 3:15:54 AM PST by Jabba the Nutt (You can have freedom or government schools. Choose one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
Here's a link with the whole article:
http://commentators.com/john-h-cochrane-an-autopsy-for-the-keynesians-wsj/
15 posted on 12/23/2014 5:11:55 AM PST by norwaypinesavage (The Stone Age did not end because we ran out of stones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jabba the Nutt
The Fed then gives the new dollars to their political favorites, who generally like the system, because they get free money.

Where did you get the silly idea that the Fed gives free money?

Have you heard of QE? Quantitative easing? The Fed bought bonds yielding 2%-4%, in exchange for cash.

So the political favorites, like JPMorgan, held fewer assets yielding 2%-4%, and more excess reserves yielding 0.25%.

Have the American Companies been creating wealth to such an extent?

Yes. American companies have been making tons of money.

16 posted on 12/23/2014 9:04:20 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
The Fed creates money out of thin air. If that isn't free then what is? That they then charge low, low, low, crazy low rates to Banks for the free money, doesn't change the fact that its free money. Every new dollar the Fed creates, it steals value from all existing dollars. This is the path to economic growth, they tell us.

Not surprisingly, it doesn't turn out well for the non-connected dupes.

17 posted on 12/31/2014 7:55:41 AM PST by Jabba the Nutt (You can have freedom or government schools. Choose one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jabba the Nutt
The Fed creates money out of thin air. If that isn't free then what is?

They can create it for free, they don't give it to anyone.

That they then charge low, low, low, crazy low rates to Banks for the free money

Banks aren't borrowing cheap money from the Fed. In fact, banks are lending trillions to the Fed right now.

18 posted on 12/31/2014 8:10:33 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
OK, I'm slow and stupid, please explain it to me. Todd, you wrote:

"The Fed bought bonds yielding 2%-4%, in exchange for cash."

Where did the Fed get the money to buy bonds?

And you wrote:

"So the political favorites, like JPMorgan, held fewer assets yielding 2%-4%, and more excess reserves yielding 0.25%."

And you also wrote:

"Banks aren't borrowing cheap money from the Fed. In fact, banks are lending trillions to the Fed right now. "

JPMorgan is or is not a bank. Keep it Simple Simple.

And outside of the oil industry, how are American Companies making tons of money?

19 posted on 01/01/2015 8:01:33 AM PST by Jabba the Nutt (You can have freedom or government schools. Choose one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jabba the Nutt
Where did the Fed get the money to buy bonds?

Central banks, like the Fed, can create money out of thin air.

JPMorgan is or is not a bank.

Is a bank.

And outside of the oil industry, how are American Companies making tons of money?

By selling their products for more than they cost to produce.

20 posted on 01/01/2015 8:44:41 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson