Well written....
though it often is not worth getting into all this it pains to read Keynesian vilification when it is not even properly applied especially when laffer goes scott free.
Well written....
I read the dialogue between Tao and Martinghoul and I must say that the facts come out on Martinghouls side.
Something missed however is that Japan hasn't really applied Keynesian economics in any serious way until quite recently. The article posted to initiate this thread is profoundly incorrect and loaded to the gills with dis-information. In particular, there's nothing other than cursory knowledge of Keynesian economics evidenced in the article. One reads such ridiculous statements as:"Since the popping of the BOJ-induced bubble in 1989, Japan has been the most faithful adherent of Keynesian principals. At the onset of the crisis, they immediately began on their misguided path with large doses of deficit spending. Instead of allowing the economy to rid itself of bad investments and heal, they continued to prop-up failed business models — creating Zombie banks and an equally Zombie-like economy" ... As if Keynes was ever an advocate for inducement of bubbles in good economic times -- he advocated just the opposite -- or propping up failed business models and creating Zombie banks. Deficit spending, yes of course! That is the temporary consequence of Keynesian economics applied during recessions. The debt acquired during recessions, however, is to be paid down during boom times. It is an unfair test of Keynesian economics when the patient stops taking the medicine half way through the course of the disease.
I am no expert on Japanese macro economics, but we all know they've suffered years of stagnation. Following on the heels of the U.S. Fed's success, and with the election of Abe, they altered course, moving more in the direction Keynes would have prescribed. They've done this, however, rather inexpertly it seems. Recently, because of concerns over still larger deficits, I would guess, Japan increased their national sales tax from 5 to 8%. I can't emphasize enough how profoundly un-Keynesian this move was! Keynes, in fact, would have prescribed just the opposite, i.e., lowering the sales tax from 5% to 3%!
What we should do in the U.S., and do it immediately, is substantially lower the income tax rate on the lower two brackets, and pay for this by bifurcating the top bracket into two, and raising the rates, progressively, on both.
My resposes to Tsing Tao's post are in italics:
That's a gross misrepresentation of what Keynes advocated!
If so then they are not paying attention to what Keynes recommended.
What Abenomics has been able to do is stop deflation and get some inflation going. Inflation hit a 23 year high in April. So yes there have been some successes coming from initiatives under Abe. I gave Abe's government too much credit, however, when I said they were inexpertly applying Keynesian economics. They've taken some monetary measures, more quantitative easing, pushed the yen down, etc. QE is a helpful adjunct to Keynesian remedies, as the money for stimuli has to come from somewhere other than taxes on the middle class. QE provides money without pressure on interest rates, but by itself isn't the kind of stimulus that Keynes suggested would get demand growing. Japan, under Abe, has tried fiscal stimulus, but needs to do much more. When the private sector is hunkering and leveraging down, hoarding cash, and not buying, the government's job is to leverage up and temporarily replace the lost private sector demand. Abe's government hasn't done enough of this and the sales tax hike threatens to undo what progress they have made. It seems the Japanese don't understand Keynes much better than you do!
You don't get it at all, as it turns out. You're referring of course to my suggestion that the U.S. should significantly lower the tax rate in the lower brackets and pay for it, at least partially, with an increase in the two highest brackets, after creating an additional upper bracket. What you fail to recognize is that this is nothing but an undoing of the supply-side tactics that briefly collapsed our progressive tax structure to nearly that of a flat tax and played no little role in getting us to where we are.
Krugman thinks that tax cuts are less effective than other Keynesian measures as far as spurring demand goes, but here I think he has temporary amnesia and has forgotten the peculiar circumstances the U.S. finds itself in after 30 years of destructive, supply-side economics. We have, we hope inadvertently, redistributed wealth from the middle class upward to the wealthy class. At this juncture, and in the specific case of the U.S., a substantial middle class tax cut would be thoroughly Keynesian, and effective in getting the consumer demand ball rolling. It would help compensate for the ill effects of 30 years of falling real wages. No wonder we are suffering from stagnant demand.
No one, least of all me, is suggesting taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It is ridiculous for you even to suggest that. I'm proposing that we continue to do what we have nearly always done since the income tax was introduced. And that is to tax each dollar earned at exactly the same rate for everyone, regardless of their wealth.
Once demand has returned, we are at full employment, and the economy is firing on all cylinders, The Fed can use the inevitable inflation as an opportunity to shrink its balance sheet and edge up interest rates. By then we will have thrown the Republican supply-siders, along with the deficit hawks, the austerity loonies, and the deflation-is-wonderful-crowd under the bus, and our always wise Congress will have adopted a suitable mix of tax rates and fiscal restraint to allow the accumulated debt to be paid down.

Following the negative growth of the gross domestic product of the July-September period (GDP), Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is to instruct the relevant ministries to develop new economic measures whereby income is handed out, such as gift certificates to the poor and to people building energy-saving housing, thought to support the personal consumption directly.
Abe also said mitigation measures for the energy price rise due to depreciation of the yen should be included.
Prime Minister in the express policy to dissolve the House of Representatives on the 18th, economic measures is expected to become the backbone of the ruling party commitment in the House of Representatives election.
The activation of consumption stimulus and regional economy and pillars, and founded the grants that local governments can use freely. Local governments to distribute the vouchers to people with low income.
The average Japanese have been living beyond their means for many years. Their day of reckoning is coming, one way or another. Just a question of whether they go gentle into that good night, so to speak.