Chrysophylax comments on Stupid Questions Thread - January 2014 - Less Wrong

10 Post author: RomeoStevens 13 January 2014 02:31AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (293)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 13 January 2014 10:53:56PM 2 points [-]

I don't follow. How can consumption increase economic growth when it comes at the cost of investment? Investment is what creates economic output.

Comment author: Chrysophylax 14 January 2014 11:28:13AM -2 points [-]

There is such a thing as overinvestment. There is also such a thing as underconsumption, which is what we have right now.

Comment author: RolfAndreassen 16 January 2014 06:23:52AM 1 point [-]

Can you define either one without reference to value judgements? If not, I suggest you make explicit the value judgement involved in saying that we currently have underconsumption.

Comment author: Chrysophylax 16 January 2014 09:33:44PM -2 points [-]

Yes, due to those being standard terms in economics. Overinvestment occurs when investment is poorly allocated due to overly-cheap credit and is a key concept of the Austrian school. Underconsumption is the key concept of Keynesian economics and the economic views of every non-idiot since Keynes; even Friedman openly declared that "we are all Keynesians now". Keynesian thought, which centres on the possibility of prolonged deficient demand (like what caused the recession), wasn't wrong, it was incomplete; the reason fine-tuning by demand management doesn't work simply wasn't known until we had the concept of the vertical long-run Phillips curve. Both of these ideas are currently being taught to first-year undergraduates.