As emphasized priorly, Keynesians staunchly believe in activist policies to reduce the amplitude of the business cycle. According to Keynes, the business cycle is the root of all economic evils and is the most important of all economic problems. To tackle this, Keynes advocated for countercyclical fiscal policies that act against the direction of the business cycle. For example, deficit spending on labor-intensive infrastructure projects to stimulate employment and stabilize wages during periods of economic downturns. In a situation of abundant demand-side growth, Keynesians would lobby for raising taxes to cool the economy and prevent inflation. They also rely on monetary policies in certain situations (minus periods of liquidity trap) to stimulate the economy, like reducing interest rates to encourage investments.
Out of all the contributions Keynes has made in the field of Economics, his interventionist approach is probably the one I most agree with. According to Keynes, economies don't stabilize themselves very quickly and require active state intervention to boost short-term demand. Wages and employment too, are slow in their response to the needs of the market, requiring government intervention to keep them on track. I firmly believe that interventionist policies are a massive improvement from the classical inclination to a laissez-faire stance. Such a "leave-it-alone" mentality can be downright harmful for the economy, as absolute autonomy can lead to chaos and mayhem, with private interests taking precedence over overall societal welfare. It also invariably widens the chasms of income inequality. Without government intervention, monopoly power would freely reign and such intervention can regulate markets to function more effectively, as well as cater to public and economic
Comments
Post a Comment