If not Keynesianism why not Marxist economics

Clearly the free market economic model doesn’t work so its time to look to alternatives now some favour Keynesianism (and I’ve already begun a thread on it) but there is another view – Marxist economics, this is the view of a number of people.

Here is something from Socialist Worker Online to get a debate rolling –

 

Clearly the US model we have does not work, but the US has not had a true free market in some time. The current model is so messed up with so much government regulation and subsides that it is a far cry from a free market.

 

Walker

So you want a freer, free market?

Can you explain what you mean and how you think it would work and why?

 

How has that been determined? Like has been mentioned there are no completely unregulated economies to begin with. Free markets or less regulated economies do have a fairly successfull track record for reducing poverty(when combined with laws that support them,property rights etc). Why is America a wealthy country? Because of our less regulated or freer economy. Free markets doesn't mean there won't be any regulations. The focus is on not having more regulations beyond what's actually needed.

Countries in Europe for example that have had more heavly regulated economies have been having problems related to that. America shouldn't be going in a more heavly regulated direction just for the sake of regulations.

 

Because, um, Marxist theory is a social theory. Not an economics model.

 

The free market without regulation is like a football game without a ref. During the housing boom a couple years ago people were getting loans for houses without any proof of income. How could that happen?

I believe in a balance between capitalism and socialism. Both extremes can be bad imo.

 

What we have right now is a mix of capitalism and socialism. Clearly it is not working (at least not for the people), but then again it was not designed to. It was designed to steal the wealth of the middle class and hand it over to the bankers and multinationals. Market manipulation is what caused the current crisis -- not "free markets." The US is not a free market economy. I know that is what you often hear from the "experts," but that's because the media has always resorted to Orwellian newspeak and doublespeak, to confuse and mislead the public so they don't know which end it up.

One of the goals of the bankers -- and they are succeeding -- is to convince the public that capitalism is the root of all our problems, and that crony and state capitalism (which is a form of socialism for the rich) is in fact "free market" capitalism when it is not and never was. This would cause people to shun capitalism and call for even more state control (the state which is controlled by the bankers) over the economy, resulting eventually in a completely managed world economy.

The end result of Keynesism and Marxism are the same. Both result in monopoly control in the hands of the state. Keynesism is all about inflation and the destruction of national currencies to offer global solutions. This is clear reading his writings.

 

What social services are leading the way right now? Because very little socialist policies are implemented in the Western World right now.

We can cite examples of capitalist mechanisms, but when it comes to socialist mechanism and examples of socialist economies I see very little in the Western World.

 

Anytime you have market manipulation via the central banks and the regulation of people's lives, that is socialism. It is that simple. Socialism is simply about increased government control and more and more governmental institutions designed to control and micromanage every facet of society. The more bloated the government becomes, the more freedoms people lose.

So to be specific, what we have today is a form of socialism, called corporatism. You can call it corporate socialism or corporate fascism. It represents the merger of the state and the corporations for the benefit of the few at the top.

Under classic socialism, it is reversed. Under classic socialism the state takes over the corporations, but like I said before, the outcomes are the same.

Anytime you are moving in the direction of bigger government and the restriction of personal freedoms, you are moving in the direction of socialism. You could just as well call it fascism. It is the consolidation of state power. To control the people you need more restricting laws and governmental institutions, which are never desgined to help the people but rather get them in the grips of the state.

Hitler used national socialism to attain a fascist state.

Today they are using corporate socialism (corporatism) to achieve a fascist state.

 

I think its pretty naive to think that the economy should be based on a simplistic model such as Keynesianism or Communism.
Economy is complex and depends on too many factors. I think practical and scientific considerations should lead the way rather than emotional utopian ideas.

 

I thought you didn't like using socialist/capitalist/ words to describe political thoughts. I thought all of that stuff was buzzword language within the dialogue of the Hegelian dialectic.

socialism vs fascism, what difference does it make when the plan is to control economies.

 

Maybe we need more socialism then! More social regulations that benefit social policies for once!

 

Market manipulation was the result of market liberal doorways and loopholes. The USA is a freer market than any market on the planet. It's the least socialist market.

 

But how can you believe in such utopian garbage when behind the scenes the same banking and corporate criminals are calling the shots. It doesn't matter which puppet they put in power, they serve the same masters. What makes you think they're going to work in the people's favor when they see the people as cattle? Sure, they will use the facade of "helping" people to increase the size of government. But it's ultimately about control. What are "social regulations" anyway? Sounds like Nazi talk to me. Why would any normal person want to regulate people's lives? They always create the problems to justfy the "solutions" and the regulations that give THEMSELVES more power.

 

Yes, and many of the other economies are in worse shape than ours.

The market manipulation stems with the Federal Reserve and their pyramid scheme called fractional reserve banking. The people on Wall Street are low-level criminals compared to the people behind the Fed. If it wasn't for fractional reserve banking, then you could not have the other, lower-level criminals making the bad loans that helped to trigger this mess.

If anything needs to be regulated, it's the Federal Reserve banks, which have never even received a proper audit. I hear none of the establishment neoliberal "economists" talking about this. But that's not a surprise because they work for the system.

 

Just look at all the wonder "socialist" policies and laws Obama has executed in just a few short weeks to turn things around.

Every child in America is going to have health care!

That's just the kind of social policy your country needs!

Those are solutions to a very big and costly problem!

 

If anything, cuts to social services are at a huge risk in a global recession. People who need employment insurance and social safety nets the most are in need of some socialist policy measures. Nationalize the banks already, do it. Instill protectionist measures on your steel, go ahead.

Close your American market borders so that you are buying from your own industries isn't of relying on foreign capital and trade.

Sustain yourself America! You can do iT!

 

Capitalism is floundering, and it needs to die. The reckless chaos of the free market may have worked up until now, but as the world population skyrockets and natural resources grow scarce we need a better, more sustainable system. The rise of Socialism is inevitable, like it or not. People can take refuge in delusions of deregulation and free markets, or they can accept reality and try to make the new system a democratic system that works for the people instead of the elites.

 

Nationalize the banks at the expense of who? Why should the taxpayers have to bail the bankers out of the mess they created? Anyone who knows anything about economics, that isn't bought and paid for, will tell you this spells disaster. Why should coming generations have to inherit the debt of previous generations? That is called enslavement.

Where are you getting this from?

Well, I am sure that whatever health care policies Obama puts forward will be vetted by his elite handlers. I mean, we know his new health secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, is a Bilderberg member.

 

I think people have a choice. They can choose capitalism and neoliberalism or they can choose something better, something democratic and socialistic that is moderate and sustainable.

Well said.