Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
True, Keynes cared little about the long run. But that wasn’t because he was gay.
Excellent!
Keyness focus on the short run was grounded in the philosophical principle of insufficient reason. If individuals have no sufficient reason to believe that a good situation today will have adverse long-term consequences, it must always be rational for them to aim to maximize their short-term good. In an essay on the conservative philosopher Edmund Burke, Keynes translated this moral principle of individual behavior into the political principle of prudence:
Burke ever held, and held rightly, that it can seldom be right . . . to sacrifice a present benefit for a doubtful advantage in the future. . . . It is therefore the happiness of our own contemporaries that is our main concern; we should be very chary of sacrificing large numbers of people for the sake of a contingent end, however advantageous that may appear. . . . We can never know enough to make the chance worth taking. . . . There is this further consideration . . . it is not sufficient that the state of affairs which we seek to promote should be better than the state of affairs which preceded it; it must be sufficiently better to make up for the evils of the transition.
This is the bedrock of Keynesian economics. So Ferguson was quite right to say that Keynes discounted the future but it was not because of homosexuality, it was because of uncertainty. Keynes would have rejected the claim of todays austerity champions that short-term pain, in the form of budget cuts, is the price we need to pay for long-term economic growth. The pain is real, he would say, while the benefit is conjecture.
The principle of not sacrificing the present for the future can be seen in Keyness intolerance of persistent mass unemployment sacrificing the current generation of workers to secure long-term improvements in the labor market. It emerges in his rejection of debt bondage the imposition of crushing long-term obligations on borrowers, undermining their prosperity. The absolutists of contract, he wrote, are the real parents of revolution.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/true-keynes-cared-little-about-the-long-run-but-that-wasnt-because-he-was-gay/2013/05/09/9f4afad4-b71e-11e2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_print.html
Burke ever held, and held rightly, that it can seldom be right . . . to sacrifice a present benefit for a doubtful advantage in the future. . . . It is therefore the happiness of our own contemporaries that is our main concern; we should be very chary of sacrificing large numbers of people for the sake of a contingent end, however advantageous that may appear. . . . We can never know enough to make the chance worth taking. . . . There is this further consideration . . . it is not sufficient that the state of affairs which we seek to promote should be better than the state of affairs which preceded it; it must be sufficiently better to make up for the evils of the transition.
This is the bedrock of Keynesian economics. So Ferguson was quite right to say that Keynes discounted the future but it was not because of homosexuality, it was because of uncertainty. Keynes would have rejected the claim of todays austerity champions that short-term pain, in the form of budget cuts, is the price we need to pay for long-term economic growth. The pain is real, he would say, while the benefit is conjecture.
The principle of not sacrificing the present for the future can be seen in Keyness intolerance of persistent mass unemployment sacrificing the current generation of workers to secure long-term improvements in the labor market. It emerges in his rejection of debt bondage the imposition of crushing long-term obligations on borrowers, undermining their prosperity. The absolutists of contract, he wrote, are the real parents of revolution.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/true-keynes-cared-little-about-the-long-run-but-that-wasnt-because-he-was-gay/2013/05/09/9f4afad4-b71e-11e2-aa9e-a02b765ff0ea_print.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1461 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
True, Keynes cared little about the long run. But that wasn’t because he was gay. (Original Post)
unrepentant progress
May 2013
OP
clarice
(5,504 posts)1. I for one, have never been a fan of Keynesian economics. nt
unrepentant progress
(611 posts)2. Good for you
Thanks for your enlightening contribution.
clarice
(5,504 posts)3. Huh? nt