subject: The Contradiction Among The Weaponized-keynesians Covers Dark Motives [print this page] The weaponized-Keynesians contend that spending by the government to make bridges will lead to loss of jobs but spending for building airplanes to drop bombs will create jobs.
Keynes himself gave a partial explanation to this ridiculous dichotomy seventy five years ago. He proposed burying cash-filled bottle in idle mines and then prodding the private sector to dig these up once more. In the same way Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman suggested that a threat of aliens could be faked as this would lead to vast spending on anti-alien spending the right kick to get the economy to chug along again.
But the foolishness of the weaponized Keynesians is not quite nave as it seems lurking behind are dark motives.
If it is admitted that spending by the government on useful projects leads to job generation is tantamount to admitting that such type of spending is good. From this it can be reasoned that in some cases the solution is the government government is not by itself the problem. There is fear in some camps that the voters will soon come to realize this.
The right has always considered Keynes economics as left oriented but it is not so.
Spending by the government on that which is useless or better still on destructive schemes does not confront the right conservatives with the same dilemma.
Michael Kalelcki, a Polish economist had made a point long ago. He said if it is admitted that the government can create jobs then the importance of business is reduced.
There must be confidence in business. This has been the pivotal debating issue for those opposing taxes as well as regulation. The whining tones of Wall Street against Obama are nothing new it is a tradition that has been well established for many years. The rich businesses circles have always argued that any type of populist stand taken by politicians will upset their cart and this they insist will harm the economy.
Once it is conceded that the government can directly create jobs the intensity of the whining is cut down to size and forfeits its power to persuade. Thus they want Keynes to be rejected except in such cases where it will fetch contracts that are lucrative.
The sudden dominance of weaponized Keynesianism is revealing the naked truth behind political debates. Basically those opposing job creation know that such projects might be successful and that defense cuts would increase unemployment. But they want the voters to remain ignorant about what they know because it would injure their bigger agenda controlling regulation and taxes to favour the rich.
