Disciples of Keynes, who focus on aggregate demand, view any increase in household wealth as raising employment because they say it adds to consumer demand.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Keynesian modelling relies on marginal propensity to consume and marginal propensity to invest. The idea that if we give more money to the poor, they have a propensity to consume that's much higher than the wealthy, though I wish they would talk to my wife about that; she seems to have a propensity to consume.
We ask from the heart that supermarkets, which are now more profitable and selling more, help us to take care of the pocketbook of the people by not raising prices.
A rise in the level of saving can reduce aggregate activity temporarily but only a sustained high level of saving makes it possible to have the sustained high level of business investment that contributes to the long-run growth of output.
Keynes's contribution was not just to advocate spending government money in the middle of a recession. Every government had done that going back to the days of the Irish potato famine. What he gave to us was a way of thinking about the magnitude and the dimensions and so forth.
Teach a parrot the terms 'supply and demand' and you've got an economist.
Inflation outstripped real wages for people who work for pay from others.
I am not a monetarist, and I am not a Keynesian. On certain points I agree with each.
Keynes was a very good economist. He was brilliant. He had wonderful insights. His work has inspired me many times.
The Keynesian belief that 'demand' is always at the root of underemployment and slow growth is a fallacy.
The Keynesian prescription for unemployment rests on the persistence of a 'money illusion' among workers, i.e., on the belief that while, through unions and government, they will keep money wage rates from falling, they will also accept a fall in real wage rates via higher prices.