Using Keynes to Remedy the Inequity of Rising Standards of Living Between Generations...

polifrog

Today Dr. Brod gave us the generational redistibutionst's argument for Keynesianism:

Economists have generally pointed out that given steadily rising standards of living, what would really be inequitable would be leaving no debt to future generations (which is the core point of Queenan's article).

In most cultures leaving a stronger, wealthier tomorrow to subsequent generations would be a source of pride.

Only in liberalism would such success be a source of envy.

How best to remedy the inequity of the rising standards of living that benefit unborn generations?

Keynes and its generational redistribution, of course. Diminishing tomorrow for today through debt.

The result being the uniform equity of no rising standard of living across generations. Heck, we know it works, just look at Japan and it's success with Keynesian sourced generational redistribution otherwise known as Japan's 20 year recession.

Ultimately arguing for Keynes' generational redistributionist qualities is an admission of Keynesian born economic stagnancy and failed growth policy.

Bugs can be features to the socialist.
Insidious.



out