Keynesian Economics in Four Paragraphs

22 January 2009 at 2:13 pm 3 comments

Courtesy of Robert Barro:

[A]ssume that the multiplier was 1.0. In this case, an increase by one unit in government purchases and, thereby, in the aggregate demand for goods would lead to an increase by one unit in real gross domestic product (GDP). Thus, the added public goods are essentially free to society. If the government buys another airplane or bridge, the economy’s total output expands by enough to create the airplane or bridge without requiring a cut in anyone’s consumption or investment.

The explanation for this magic is that idle resources — unemployed labor and capital — are put to work to produce the added goods and services.

If the multiplier is greater than 1.0, as is apparently assumed by Team Obama, the process is even more wonderful. In this case, real GDP rises by more than the increase in government purchases. Thus, in addition to the free airplane or bridge, we also have more goods and services left over to raise private consumption or investment. In this scenario, the added government spending is a good idea even if the bridge goes to nowhere, or if public employees are just filling useless holes. Of course, if this mechanism is genuine, one might ask why the government should stop with only $1 trillion of added purchases.

What’s the flaw? The theory (a simple Keynesian macroeconomic model) implicitly assumes that the government is better than the private market at marshaling idle resources to produce useful stuff. Unemployed labor and capital can be utilized at essentially zero social cost, but the private market is somehow unable to figure any of this out. In other words, there is something wrong with the price system.

Barro thinks a multipler of zero is a more plausible baseline assumption. Of course, if GDP is adjusted for quality, the multipler is most likely negative, as resource allocation is directed by government officials, not consumer demands. In prior work Barro has estimated wartime multiplers of 0.8, but this seems high based on Robert Higgs’s important work [1, 2]. More important, there the Austrian point that resources are heterogeneous, and the additional goods and services financed by government spending will tend to be in the “wrong” place in the economy’s intertemporal structure of production.  Keynes rejected the idea of capital heterogeneity, so this problem was lost on him.

Entry filed under: - Klein -, Classical Liberalism, Myths and Realities, Public Policy / Political Economy.

That Great Klein (1996) Paper Technological Change

3 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Uncle B  |  27 January 2009 at 7:31 am

    If, and that is a big “IF” Obama succeeds in Solar efforts in the American South West, and relieves the costs, direct, implied and blackmailed, of imported oil, we will no longer pay for the oil or the wars, in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, or any where else the subversive bastards want our “Mercenaries for oil favors” army. Additionally, we will set out on a new technological course on a virgin territory, developing solar installations, adaptations, new fuels, cars, and lifestyles, leaving the “burn something 1930’s lifestyle” we now cherish, and develop a sustainable lifestyle for Americans. Wind power can work in the same direction. The thing the American mindset cannot get is that these energy forms are perpetual! not just sustainable, and the magic phrase “renewable” but perpetual in nature! Like an oil well that never goes dry, once a solar or wind installation is complete, for maintenance costs only, it keeps producing forever! If Obama can get the US. hooked on this mindset, we will be ushered into the 21 century and a new technology age with great abundance – We just have to unhook from the OPEC and Saudi status quo, adapt to wind, solar, wave, geothermal,and tidal power and we are there! It is not a matter of economics alone, it is a matter of leverage on society!

  • […] Keynesianism will (or will not) work In 1 on February 26, 2009 at 1:20 PM This article is a neo-classical take on Keynes. It presents the rationale behind why Keynes’ theory is […]

  • […] Klein’s Blog Oganizations and Markets has a nice post on simplfying Keynsian Economics taken from Robert […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Nicolai J. Foss | home | posts
Peter G. Klein | home | posts
Richard Langlois | home | posts
Lasse B. Lien | home | posts


Former Guests | posts


Recent Posts



Our Recent Books

Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Nicolai J. Foss and Volker Mahnke, eds., Competence, Governance, and Entrepreneurship: Advances in Economic Strategy Research (Oxford, 2000).
Nicolai J. Foss and Paul L. Robertson, eds., Resources, Technology, and Strategy: Explorations in the Resource-based Perspective (Routledge, 2000).

%d bloggers like this: