Keynesian vs. Austrian Economics - The Infographic

There has been an unsettled debate among economists for a century now of whether government intervention is beneficial to an economy. The heart of this debate lies between Keynesian and Austrian economists (though there are other schools as well).

In order to get a full understanding of the two schools of economic thought, we offer the following via The Austrian Insider...

And some responses to popular criticisms:

- “Animal Spirits is misrepresented” – I just personally thought explaining that further would be too much text.  If anyone would like to get a full explination of what Keynes meant by this term, read this Wikipedia article on Animal Spirits

- “This is biased towards the Austrian School” – Well I am obviously an Austrian economist, so there is only so much I can argue with that point.  That said, I HONESTLY tried to represent Keynes properly and would love to hear from any Keynesians what can be changed to help represent them properly.

- “Malthus was not an economist” - He may be more of a philosopher, but many consider him an influence of Keynes.

- “Ron Paul is not an economist” - Just because he is a doctor and politician by profession does not mean he is not a well known Austrian Economist.  He has many books on the subject, is a senior fellow of the Mises Institute, and has personally got many individuals to research Austrianism further

- “It should not be total utils, but marginal utility on that graph” – It is supposed to represent the marginal utility graph, I just didn’t label it.  The graph should show total utility marginally decreases with each dollar increase.  The printable version has the entire chart labeled.

- “Praxeology is not the right term to describe the whole organizational pattern of the social order. It refers only to the logical implications of human action that can be known through deduction.” - Well put.  Just hard to figure out how to graphically represent that...

Comments

[Radical Marijuana]

The oldest and best developed form of social science and social engineering was warfare. Economics developed inside the context of warfare. Since successful warfare was based upon backing up deceits with destruction, successful finance became based upon enforcing frauds.

The only things that actually exist are the dynamic equilibria between different systems of organized lies operating robberies. The currently established systems, namely bankster controlled governments, are EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL at what those were actually designed to do, in the sense that the banksters' frauds are SYMBOLIC ROBBERIES, which have transferred trillions upon trillions of the tokens of wealth and claims over ownership from the many to the few.

The social FACTS that a tiny minority own more than the vast majority demonstrates that "economics" IS "scientific."  However, economics is scientific social engineering in the same ways as warfare was scientific social engineering. The successfulness of being the victors through warfare became the successfulness of being the victors in economics. That the social pyramid systems have gotten bigger and BIGGER, while also getting steeper and STEEPER, are due to economics being systems of organized lies operating robberies, which were being done better and BETTER, from the point of view of those who were the best at operating those systems.

Those who judge economic theories on the superficial basis of what the professional hypocrites promoting those theories are asserting their theories are supposed to do tend to deliberately ignore what those theories actually do! There is ONLY ONE theory that corresponds to all the social facts, and that is civilization operates according to the principles and methods of organized crime. Furthermore, after one understands that enough, one will discover how and why that is necessarily the case, since the monetary systems are backed up by the murder systems, and must necessarily be so.

Theories of economics that do not place themselves inside the context of the history of warfare are bullshit! However, the most socially successful theories of economics deliberately do NOT do that, because of the intense paradoxes driven by the history of successful warfare based on backing up deceits with destruction becoming the history of successful finance based on enforcing frauds.

Economics ONLY becomes more intelligible after one takes the time to understand the vicious spirals of POLITICAL FUNDING ENFORCING FRAUDS, enabling the development of bankster controlled governments. Those systems achieve what they were designed to achieve, namely the runaway triumphant frauds as symbolic robberies. Since those systems so spectacularly achieve their real goals, those systems deserve to be respected as effective forms of social science and social engineering, albeit based upon being able to operate integrated systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, which require the vast majority of the people being symbolically robbed by the banksters' legalized frauds do not understand that, and do not want to understand that.

Therefore, I repeat my original comment, already posted above, that neither Keynesian nor Austrian economics engage in deeper analysis: BOTH ARE BULLSHIT, because both stay inside of the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, whereby the theories of economics are deliberately misrepresented as much as possible, compared to what they actually achieve, because ECONOMICS IS A SCIENCE IN THE SAME WAY THAT WARFARE IS A SCIENCE.

MILITARISM IS THE IDEOLOGY OF THE MURDER SYSTEM, AS THE MOST EXTREME FORM OF ECONOMICS, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE IDEOLOGY OF THE ROBBERY SYSTEM, WHICH HAS DEVELOPED TO PRIMARILY MANIFEST AS THE BANKSTERS' SYMBOLIC ROBBERIES.

Bankster controlled governments have become extremely successful forms of organized lies operating robberies, in the sense that those doing that have become almost unimaginably more wealthy, in the sense of more politically powerful. The basic problems with respect to most people not understanding that, and not wanting to understand that, are that they have become way too brainwashed to believe in bullshit about "economics." Therefore, they tend to take for granted thinking about everything in the most absurdly backward ways possible. Indeed, it is practically impossible to exaggerate the degree to which almost everyone thinks about "economics" in the most bullshit-based ways possible, which is how and why so many of them end up falsely concluding that economics is somehow not scientific, when economics is actually fantastically successful social engineering.

[gizmotron]

Arguing about economic theory, while a tiny cadre of oligarchs run fiscal policy, is dark irony. Our fiscal system runs not on the theories of Keynes or Hayak, but on the corruptions of greed, power, cronyism, revoloving doors, and military-industrial-congressional fascism. As long as we continue this death spiral into total plutocracy, "economic theory" remains irrelevant. Greed and corrupted power will find a way to subvert all theory, and this planet will continue to fall deeper into unhealthy socioeconomic proportionality.

[Spiritof42]

That is true from your perspective. On the personal side, it opens one's eyes to the magnitude of the frauds. I manage my finances to avoid them as much as possible. I know people who are very vulnerable because they can't see the danger no matter how I explain it to them.

[GoldSilverBitcoinBug]

Well, what I see is Keynesian are loved because this economic system is so statist that it's a socialist and communist wet dream...

I understand better why Austrian are so "hated" now...

BTW, bitcoin is Libertarian and Austrian :)