LogFAQs > #986303475

LightningStrikes posted...

Sure, there is absolutely something to the fact that the Republicans have typically made up
for their other spending cuts with increased military spending (Trump less so). However this also gets to why Military Keynesianism is a different economic approach to regular Keynesianism, because one is (in the American context) focusing on military alone while the other is investing in infrastructure and welfare. Related sure but different. The other thing is that Obama used Keynesianism as the response to the 2008 crash while Europe essentially across the board used austerity and the result was a much faster recovery for the US. The EU28 was a bigger economy than the US in 2007, now its well behind. Some are only just now getting back to 2007 levels per capita, others are well behind. Though there are exceptions like economic superstar Poland of course. So Im not sure I quite see your argument. Keynesianism seems to have worked well in the US at least. Which does not even mention how relative to the size of economy military spending has significantly declined as well.

This is what I call bending backwards. This is a liberal version of the argument but there's conservative versions too. At the end of the day, you're all unified under keynesianism. It's the most universally encompassing philosophy that human history has ever seen.

By the way, 100% of US keynesianism is coupled to military spending. A large part is also driven by our inflated healthcare system, and our venture capital tech economy, but even those sectors are fully reliant on USD being the global reserve currency, which is enforced by the military.

An America without war and with universal healthcare is an austere and anti-keynesian America. I dream of it.