austrianomics.com Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics Featuring Ben Bernanke, Paul Krugman, Peter Schiff, and Ron Paul Also check out www.youtube.com
Related Blogs
- A survey of the history of macroeconomics from Keynes to Lucas and …
- Peter Schiff on April 2010 Jobs Report and more » Schiff, Peter …
- Peter Schiff & Steven Keen on Dateline – Part 2/2 » Australia …
- SANDY AGREES (JUST A BIT) WITH PAUL KRUGMAN! | Virginia Right!
- Audit the Fed Amendment Modified – Allows Fed To Keep Secrets …
Posted in 
Tags: 
@BlackFlame281 In fact, Canada has done better than all the G7 countries. Why? The difference is that Canada did not relax their lending standard like the US. This was a critical factor. So the whole “the government done it” answer to every problem has some major problems. There were multiple factors, partly by corporations partly by government.
Bryan Caplan is not a Austrian for multiple reasons but the main one is that he doesn’t hold to the ABCT.
@Visfen The world housing crisis is extremely important if we are interested in what/why it happened. When people blame Freddie and Fannie, they still need to explain why countries that didn’t have these institutions crashed. Some have tried to blame the community reinvestment act. Again, this program was limited to the US. We could blame the FED which was definitely part of the problem. However, Canada had similar interest rates but have not experienced the same delinquency rates. –>
@rysw19 What the fuck are you even talking about. If by restrictions you mean restrictions on restrictions, then you would be right, but obviously you don’t so you’re just being retarded. shanedk has videos on the constitution here on youtube, you should watch them,.
@Visfen the only way to make something regular IS to set restrictions. i’m afraid you’re the one who’s shown incompetence. good day.
@BlackFlame281 You mean in countries like Spain?Is it that important really?
Well the battle is being won gradually in academia as well, I think you’re dead wrong in suggesting Austrians are simply laughed at there. Again, Robert Lucas considered himself an Austrian, Bryan Caplan doesn’t, but I don’t see what he disagrees with them on
There is a problem with the Austrians “eating their own”
He wasn’t ahead of the curve but he was sure out there more than anyone else. Of course he wasn’t alone
@Visfen The myth I’m referring to is that Peter Schiff was ahead of the curve in predicting the crisis. This simply is not true. “…nobody in all honesty have been so vocal about it as Peter..” NOT TRUE. Dean Baker was screaming about it in 2002 and did so until the collapse.
@BlackFlame281 …were housing crisis in other countries. But you are correct to say that Austrians are winning the battle of ideas. We can thank YT and Alex Jones for that! Of course, in the world of academic journals, Austrians are still laughed at. Even in the Austrian journals, they are attacking each other so much that it’s hard to even understand what Austrians believe anymore. Rothbard and Mises have been shredded within.
@BlackFlame281 There’s thousands of videos out there of different economists talking about this, but nobody in all honesty have been so vocal about it as Peter have been.
I’m not sure what myth you’re referring to, a lot of people predicted the crisis.
He was of on the headfake, where people rushed into the dollar after the collapse. But that was like a six month trend at most, he’s not investing in that kind of window, neither is actually anyone because then you’re not an investor.
@Visfen The problem with this video is that it makes it seem like Peter Schiff was the only one to figure this out when in fact, there were plenty of other people. This myth keeps spreading around especially on YT. Schiff wasn’t even the first Austrian to figure this out. Plus, many of Schiff’s predictions turned out to be way off especially on the US decoupling and investing in foreign currencies. His explanation of the crisis is also off since it can’t explain why there were …
@BlackFlame281 It’s not only taken seriously “on youtube”. There’s a difference in short trader and investors, and on universities and finance. People who work with long term investments in finance usually are less Keynesian while short traders and public workers are more Keynesian.
Though one should also not that 40 years ago Robert Lucas considered himself an Austrian Economist, so the definitions have shifted and well… we’re winning the battle of ideas.
@BlackFlame281 Far behind? He started talking about it long before 2006, in 2005 he started writing the book that made him famous and he’d been talking about it since 2004. Schiff is famous because he laid it out exactly like it happened, while a lot of Keynesian basically said “well it due for a new collapse, because it usually happens every 15 years”. That’s not really understanding the problem, because Keynesians don’t understand what causes an economic crisis, they don’t agree with Say’s law
@rysw19 Yeah, make regular, that means they have the power to force the state to accept interstate commerce and not set up barriers between them. That’s what it says, explicitly.
You on the other hand is taking it as if the had the power to restrict it.
No, I’m totally disagreeing with what you’re saying, because you don’t understand the constitution, or sadly for that matter English. Make regular is the opposite of setting restrictions.
@mydogjesus You must be doing research on YT because a ton of Keynesians predicted the housing bubble. The first person to predict the housing bubble was in 2000. Schiff figured it out in 2006 when everything was already falling apart. In fact, awards have been given out to people predicting the crash and Schiff was so far behind the curve that he wasn’t even mentioned.
What this video doesn’t bother to mention is that in 2000, Wynne Godley (Keynesian economist) was the first to predict the housing crash. Also not mentioned, Dean Baker (2002), Jakob Madsen (2003), Ann Pettifor (2003), Michael Hudson (2004), Steve Keen, Nouriel Roubini (2005) and many others predicted the housing bubble before Schiff. These people are all Keynesians. It is only on YT where 19 year old kids get their economic education that this BS is taken seriously.
@Visfen haha! you just said a second ago, “it’s not though, I’m not sure what you are referring to here,” and the commerce clause explicitly states that congress has the power to regulate congress. and yes, they did mean make regular (i.e. setting standard restrictions).
so now you’ve contradicted yourself, because you just agreed with what i was saying.
@rysw19 Yeah, I figure you would bring that up. Those are numerated powers, and “regulate” meant “make regular” when the law was written. Not to control everything everywhere with central planning.
I’m ignorant? You don’t even know what it says. I’m more educated on how the constitution works than you are.
@Visfen it IS in the constitution, article one. it’s called the commerce clause. you are obviously entirely ignorant of our political system. regulation been a part of this country since the day it was founded; it is one of the principle roles of our government. even the continental congress had the authority to regulate trade. (wiki it… i’m sure you have no idea what it was.)
@rysw19 Why? Is that really the right question? The right question is if they should. They started to regulate because they wanted control and influence over the money.
So what if it’s in the constitution. (it’s not though, I’m not sure what you are referring to here)
Sure it has a moral aspect, it is always benefiting both parties. This is the ricardian concept of free trade.
@Visfen if you believe somehow that the market will completely regulate itself, why did the government ever start regulating in the firstplace? it’s in the constitution; congress has the power to regulate commerce.
second, you obviously don’t know what amoral means. amoral just means that it has no moral aspect (ergo government regulation is necessary to protect the interest of the people).
@rysw19 : The system is under-regulated alright. It isn’t being regulated by the “free market regulation” you are so dismissive of. People need to believe that if they do enough stupid stuff, they just might wind up living under a bridge…
This was brilliant. It was a very very powerful way to illustrate the point. I had done my own research (so I already knew this) but for those who are still clueless about all of this, it may help them to finally see that the media is not telling the truth anymore. They are bought & paid for by big banks, and anyone who tells the truth is laughed at right up to almost the moment of the crash. The Keynesians are about making rich people richer, not the poor or middle class.
Hahaha!! Bernanke is a clown!
Peter Schiff and his Austrian brand DESTROYED the Keynesians! Now consider, that the talking head of the Keynesians really are just stupid, but the sinister Keynesians like Bernake and Geithner KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They are INTENTIONALLY DESTROYING the dollar and our economy. IT IS NOT BY ACCIDENT. Stop debating the obvious. It is time to END THE FED!
It is hard to swallow, but it is appereant that Ben Bernanke has no, zip, zero idea about the state of the economy.
“I have no idea what Peter Schiff is talking about” (6:23). Yeah, I think that’s the only thing any of these clowns got right.