Keynesian Economics Vs. Keynesian Policy

2447 Words5 Pages

After the Great Depression in 1929 John Maynard Keynes had attempted to provide a solution to much of the economic instability that had occurred in the US. Keynes’ revolutionary solution to the problem, later known as Keynesian economics, had proposed the idea of fiscal policies, being government intervention in the economy in the form if fiscal spending to aid the economy’s growth. In the years that followed an economist by the name of Milton Friedman, a known monetarist, challenged Keynes’ theory by suggesting that fiscal spending should be limited. Friedman argued that fiscal spending can only worsen an economy with small term effects, which not only will not be effective or felt, but will make the situation worse. Friedman’s take on the issue was that the government should be less involved and allow the free market to tune things out. Both economist and their theories have proven to work at one point, however, I would prefer Friedman’s monetary solutions to be more effective. Fiscal spending seen historically can be a hit or miss determined by ideal economic conditions. Preferring consistency I would favor monetary solutions to deal with unstable economies at the cost of seeing slight downturns. 1

During the 1930’s when John Maynard Keynes had first began to propose the idea of fiscal policies he was generally aware of the opposition to his theory both traditionally and during his time pertaining to government control. Keynes’ concept the “Keynesian multiplier” is the idea that “any change in spending by one person starts a snowball effect, ultimately, “causing a change in national spending far surpassing the initial change” (Buchholz, 2007, p. 221). The theory here is that by determining what the multiplier is and then accor...

... middle of paper ...

...Keynes disregards the power money, however, I think money is an important thing to consider. Monetarist explanation of enough money in the economy for employment and the purchase all goods is more sensible than having high quantity of money in the economy that only raises the price of goods and services leaving people with devalue currency. I would favor monetary economic maneuvering of the economy because while in the short term it may be undesirable, however, in the long haul it does not rely on higher taxes and interest rates paid by people for the economy’s recovery, but maintains its fixed rate of deductions for people. The government instead of pumping large sums of money hoping it helps the economy should follow fixed rates, along with its control of the money supply, to tune things out instead of going up and down based on the economy’s performance.

Open Document