Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2012 Sanjeev Sabhlok's revolutionary blog
Finally got around to listening to the debate. It is a shame that anyone "voted" for Keynes after the debate – although Hayek was declared the winner. That there are people who believe in free lunches (Keynesianism) boggles the mind. The TOTAL lack of understanding of incentives that Keynesians display is another big worry. How do these duffers get to govern?
An example – Christina Romer (Obama's economic adviser) – read this: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2011/08/07/these-people-are-shameless-and-unteachable/
Selgin did a very good job at outlining Hayek's position, although I think he could have run the public choice arguments (of government incompetence) even further, and focused primarily on liberty, not utilitarianism. I encourage you to subscribe to Selgin's blog here. Selgin is a major thought leader in the world today.
Here's the link to the debate: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b012wxyg 44 minutes. Eminently worthwhile.
It would be nice to get a transcript of this debate sometime – can you please let me know if you find it somewhere? (I can run the debate through automatic voice recognition software (Dragon), perhaps, as well – subject to time.)
(Selgin is pictured on the left, below. His Facebook profile, in case you want to be his FB friend, is here. I suggest you make friends with all good economists – this is a great way to get to know what they are up to)
Also read: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/2011/08/is_economics_the_new_rock_n_ro_1.html
Addendum
If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email:
Join the Freedom Team of India or become a Freedom Partner.
Related posts:
- Waiting for the public broadcast of the London School of Economics debate: Hayek vs Keynes
- Hayek the ant vs Keynes the grasshopper
- Continuing the Keynes debate. Have I gone overboard?
- Keynes broke the first law of economics hence was a fool
- Dorian Electra is electrifying the teaching of economics. What chance does Keynes have now?
- Peter Schiff’s DIRECT DEBATE with the Occupy Wall St movement
- Mathematical proof that Hayek was right
- Is a re-union of the two churches of economics in the offing?
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s attack on Hayek doesn’t stick #2
- Once a school voucher program is in place, regulatory controls must ease
To spread the message of liberty and critical thinking, please share this post
Hello Sanjeev,
I have heard this keynes vs hayek debate. I'm not satisfied with the quality of the debate.. most of the debate is just talk. I want to read either a good book or a good survey paper which compares the sides. I have no background in economics. So a good book which also tells me what economic indicators should be used and cites unbiased data (if there is such) would be great. Since you have background in economics, can you recommend a book like that? Again, I am more interested in seeing the data from two sides than seeing who is the winner.
I am sick of political sound-bites, angry rants or tv anchors talking about it. Doesn't cut it. I want data, metrics used and academic discussion without taking sides. Any recommendation would be useful.
Thanks!
Dear KK
I wish life were so simple that one could avoid the hard work of exploring the details oneself. Indeed, from the perspective I come from the radio talk actually covered almost all the key issues from both sides. Basically this boils down to whether the government knows about us better than we know ourselves. Keynes thinks he is smarter than us and can, as a government, tell us what is good for us. Hayek disagrees. Keynes is a socialist in the Fabian socialist mode (pretty much what Nehru was), and a central planner. Hayek comes from the classical school of economics – of Adam Smith. Just like Nehru ruined India, Keynes has ruined the West.
Anyway, you want a reference. Re: Keynes, pl. search “Keynes” on my blog and you’ll find numerous blog posts – and references. Re: Hayek, do read up his Constitution of Liberty.
S
Thanks for the reply. I know the basic difference in philosophy. I am not afraid of hard work, but I just want to access as accurate data as possible. For example, in US, republicans claim that Reagen era was really the best possible time while democrats claim that Reagen actually increased the deficit etc etc. And surprisingly both cite some data (probably selectively to prove their point). That selective data presentation is what I don't like.
Let me see what I can dig!
Both republicans and democrats have followed welfare state and Keynesian policies. They are the same.
There is therefore no counter-factual (of non-Keynesian policies) in the West till before Keynes. Keynes was the so-called “bridge” between Marx and capitalism. A socialist, he fitted in well with the desires of politicians of both sides.
The debate currently being played out is purely academic. 100% of government economists are Keynesians. Those who hark back to Adam Smith (and now Hayek) are not hired by governments. It is only in the last five to seven years, with the work of Mises institute, that Hayekian ideas (and those of Adam Smith) have been revived in the public debates.
Fortunately, with the internet, there is no place for Keynesians to hide. And given the mess they Keynesians have made, everyone is looking for something sensible. And there is nothing more sensible than classical liberalism.