Keynesian

(redirected from Keynesianism)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

Keynesian

A scholar or other person who believes that government intervention is necessary to ensure an active and vibrant economy. According to this theory, government should stimulate demand for goods and services in order to encourage economic growth. It thus recommends tax cuts and increased government spending during recessions to reinvigorate growth; likewise, Keynesians recommend tax increases and spending cuts during economic expansion in order to combat inflation. Many economists believe that Keynesian economic theory is more efficient than supply-side economics, though critics point to the theory's inability to explain stagflation in the United States during the 1970s.
References in periodicals archive ?
A serious problem with this argument is that the counterrevolution against Keynesianism did not occur ex nihilo.
By these means, non-universal, non-abstract political economy is confirmed as the 'science of government'; civilization works to forestall 'existential anxiety' (p.7); and Keynesianism is essentially Machiavellian (p.
Is there any economic significance of the active role of the government in the economy during a time of departure from the Washington Consensus and the instauration of a new Keynesianism following the demise of the old methodology of state interventionism?
Here is a minor criticism of, as I say, your otherwise very excellent critique of left wing fiscal Keynesianism. You refer to "regulations that make wages stickier." But your use of the word "stickier" implies that without these unwise and improper governmental interferences, wages would still be "sticky." Less, so, but they would still suffer from this malady.
In common life experience, few pressing problems are best solved slowly over decades." White further rejects Keynesianism when he says, "American economic history does not support the idea that a strong economy depends on chronic federal borrowing."
(2008) 'What will follow the demise of privatised Keynesianism?', Political Quarterly 79 (4): 476-87.
Another (related) oddity that is not addressed in the book is that Keynesianism in Britain soon became unhelpfully associated with a dysfunctional form of socialist thinking rather different in tenor and substance from Keynes's own ideas.
Keynesianism, Kates explains, explicitly rejects Say's Law and asserts that a free market is prone to "failures" and crises, to excessive production, deficient consumption, and depressions; it further insists that government deficit spending, money printing, and near-zero interest rates can fix said market failures.
As Gary North reminds us in his recent essay "Dancing on the Grave of Keynesianism" (2012), the most probable scenario is that the welfare-warfare state in the West, like its mad distant and radical relative Soviet communism, will simply be crushed under its own weight.
But how different, really, is this opposition between neoliberalism and Keynesianism? Do these macroeconomic philosophies actually represent two agonistically opposed policy positions, or, like the debate surrounding political representation in the mid-nineteenth century, do these positions merely reflect two different instantiations of today's dominant cartography of power?
Summary: In the nearly five years since the worst financial crash since the Great Depression, the remedy for the world's economic doldrums has swung from full-on Keynesianism to unforgiving austerity and back.
'I don't want to oppose Keynesianism with more classic theories on Europe,' Higgins concluded, 'but I hope for a response to the crisis, which will reflect the colorful spectre of our history.