Keynes vs. Schmeynes Debate

Michael Stephens | November 14, 2011

If you missed last week’s Reuters-sponsored Keynes vs. Hayek debate at the Asia Society, video of the event is attached below, beginning with James Galbraith’s contribution.

The debate, predictably, ended up being more about the last two-and-a-half years of economic policy.  Note also the way in which this turns into a Democratic Keynesianism vs Republican Keynesianism debate; due in no small part to the Wall Street Journal‘s Steve Moore, who argues that instead of Obama’s wretched ARRA, a mixture of tax cuts and spending increases, what we really need is … a mixture of tax cuts and spending increases.  The key to being a Moore-style Schmeynesian, as near as I can tell, is that when describing Obama’s policies one ignores the tax cuts, and when describing Reagan-era fiscal policy one mumbles something about “defense” rather than spending increases.

(Note also Galbraith’s list of Hayek’s later policy preferences, which would place Hayek somewhere in the progressive wing of today’s Democratic Party).


One Response to “Keynes vs. Schmeynes Debate”

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

  1. Comment by TylerNovember 15, 2011 at 8:11 am   Reply

    Moore ruined the debate. It was a mistake to invite him. He’s a moron, so it makes sense that he writes for The Murdoch Street Journal.

Leave a Reply