Macroeconomics - The Keynesian Model I.mp4

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 27 сер 2024
  • Graphical explanation of the Keynesian Macro economic aggregate demand/aggregate supply model, including his criticisms of the Classical model.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 78

  • @martynafidler2768
    @martynafidler2768 10 років тому +11

    Thank you for this explanation, your tutorials are amazing!

  • @EricColeThornton
    @EricColeThornton 6 років тому

    Wow! Thank you. I have been assigned to teach AP Macroeconomics this year, and I am a history major. Your videos are a big help for me to understand the materials.

  • @LJStability
    @LJStability 12 років тому

    These are great lectures! Thank you for posting them for people who are taking economics.

  • @robbietackett5400
    @robbietackett5400 7 років тому

    Thank you for posting these videos and your lectures. I'm currently studying political science and I find it incredibly helpful in developing my own ideas when I have access to supplemental information like this.

  • @LolNowCryLaterr
    @LolNowCryLaterr 11 років тому

    I love the simplicity he brings to this confusing subject ha thanks!

  • @xxBrklynzhoti5xx
    @xxBrklynzhoti5xx 10 років тому

    lord why cant you be my professor.. you explained it so much better and clearer then he would ever!

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    You make my point FOR me. The government didn't meddle until 1921 and then only by the Fed rather than meddling with the gold standard, massively ramping up fiscal spending, etc. In relative terms, there was virtually no meddling in the 1920 crash compared to a decade later.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    To the contrary, the only reason that the Depression (theoretically rather than actually) ended earlier for those countries is a gross misunderstanding of the GDP calculation which was never intended as an actual measure of economic performance. In fact, the man who developed the measure expressly warned against using it as such particularly during wartime and during periods of massive government expenditure. The underlying economies stagnated for much longer.

  • @yasminemask9318
    @yasminemask9318 4 роки тому

    Sir, you are the best very simple and clear explanation that was very helpful

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "Of course, the raising of the discount rate FOLLOWED the creation of the monetary bubble" Yes they raised DR which caused the deflation i listed. But then they lowered the discount rate, In April and May 1921, Federal Reserve member banks lowed their rates to 6.5% or 6%. In November 1921, there were further falls in discount rates: rates fell to 4.5% in the Boston, Philadelphia, New York, and to 5% or 5.5% in other reserve banks. That is what created the inflation RB is talking about.

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "That the longer term implications were considerably worse in the Great Depression was the result of gov't meddling that did not occur in 1920." But the gov't did meddle. Don't take my word for it. From Rothbard " In July, 1921, the Federal Reserve announced that it would extend further credits for harvesting and agricultural marketing, up to whatever amounts were legitimately required. Soon, Secretary Mellon was privately proposing that business be further stimulated by cheap money......

  • @louisewells348
    @louisewells348 10 років тому

    Thank you so much for your videos! I'm studying my degree online and these videos are such a massive help - all of our online study group use them. Many thanks! Perth, Western Australia

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    Rothbard continued " “... The 1921-1922 inflation, in sum, was promoted in order to relieve the recession, stimulate production and business activity, and aid the farmers and the foreign loan market.” he also said ". In December, 1920, the War Finance Corporation was revived as an aid to farm exports, and a $100 million Foreign Trade Financial Corporation was established. Farm agitation against short-selling led to the Capper Grain Futures Act," from "America’s Great Depression"

  • @mpc91
    @mpc91 12 років тому

    To respond to 3:54, prices and wages were not allowed to fall, first by pressure from President Hoover, and then by law in FDR.
    It's not as if 1929 was the first downturn, but it was the first downturn where government "rolled up" it's sleeves and tried to fix things. And it lasted 17 years.
    The "purchasing power" argument is also pure, unadulterated bunk. It's not about purchasing power, economies are about production of products and services for peoples use, and prices coordinate that use.

  • @stephenkneller9318
    @stephenkneller9318 7 років тому

    What is interesting is looking at why the Great Depression in America lasted a decade. The answer is proto-Keynesian economic thought.
    In the Classical Model, wages would fall. However, by agreement, major industrialists in America pledged to maintain predepression wages. They did this under the assumption that those working would not curtail spending. And while millions were laid off, many were not. Many of those who kept their jobs, also kept their wages. This resulted in the fact that prices were not able to fall. Furthermore, it created the problem that employee wages were too high for the market value. Many of the industrialists, to their credit maintained their wage levels for those employees. But to cut costs, they refused to replace predepression employees who no longer worked there. This aggravated the unemployment levels throughout the depression.
    Because many wages did not fall, nor did prices. This caused many products outside the purchasing powers of many Americans, especially those who were unemployed. As a result, the classical model could not correct. Eventually through attrition at the firms which maintained wage levels and the refusal to hire replacement employees, the prices did start to drop. But again, the unemployed could not benefit with employment from this. However, after bleeding money on maintaining wages, the industrials complained to the government concerning the deflationary pressure in their product prices. The New Dealer responded with corporatist laws that fought to maintain prices. The most obvious display of this was in the agricultural sector. When the government determined to keep prices high, let's say porkbellies, they ordered a mass culling of herds. And to ensure those culled pig could not enter the market, they spread lye on the corpses, even in front of staving Americans. Because of actions of the New Dealers, deflationary pressure on prices were fought retarding correction.
    Because of those that maintain wages and the New Dealers' war on deflationary price corrections, those unfortunately unemployed could not find jobs. Those major corporations who initially refused to maintain predepression wages found replacing workers at the sage wage rate as economically untenable. So they simply refused to replace those lost through attrition. As a result, unemployment remained high while corrections learned to maintain reduced production with even less personnel. And even when those major employers finally did reject their initial wage pledge and did begin to hire at lower wages, they had learned that many less employees were needed to produce the lower demand levels of products due to efficiency. This meant that even while production ramping up and lower wages were paid, far less workers positions were required.
    The history behind America's Great Depression demonstrates that government and corporate intervention and changes were the cause of the failure of the Classic Model.

  • @Sam91
    @Sam91 8 років тому +5

    Thank you sir, it was really helpful.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Of course, the raising of the discount rate FOLLOWED the creation of the monetary bubble (and that as the crash played out (as in the Great Depression and the latest economic crisis) the lack of confidence in the banking system and the huge incentives to increase reserves locks that money up in the banking system. Look at the change that has occurred over the last 5 years to see how HUGE that can be.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    To the contrary, there was no "deflationary period" to be anticipated and, in fact, there were economists predicting the 1929 debacle as well. Moreover, as the Great Depression was not triggered by "excessive private debt and leveraged speculation" either (both were the result of monetary expansion that was unsustainable), the point is moot. That the longer term implications were considerably worse in the Great Depression was the result of gov't meddling that did not occur in 1920.

  • @akashkalyana8295
    @akashkalyana8295 8 років тому +1

    Thank you sir,you made life easy...love from india

  • @ujwalakishore2321
    @ujwalakishore2321 10 років тому +4

    Thank You Sooo Very Much Sir! You nearly saved my life today :)

  • @xolisalila8106
    @xolisalila8106 8 років тому +1

    I found it difficult to dinstinct the two-Keynesian and Classical Model. But now... Great

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    Pt 2. 18 months is a long time compared to the keynesian era (1945-1973) where the average depression was 11 months. Lastly the Central Bank (the fed) played a role in ended it. The Fed eased interest rates in 1921 which lead a later expansion of economic activity :)

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Elimination of the gold standard never helped anything, buffer stock management didn't even occur until 1922 (and wasn't a factor until at least the 1950s). And, yes Keynes said that (wasn't aware I was arguing with a frequently obliterated website), but the assertion was laughably absurd (though not nearly as much as the defense of the "pent up demand" nonsense) as social security is illiquid and held by government not used as investment in beneficial anything.

  • @apoorvasharma8500
    @apoorvasharma8500 3 роки тому

    I have one doubt with the purchasing power argument
    As workers get jobs and prices are reduced, the demand in the market do increase as people will start buying like they used to before the depression/ recession hit them.
    Please correct me if I am wrong.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Of course, Keynes' assertion that "it takes too long" was both subjective and disingenuous. In 1920, an economic downturn that was in many ways FAR more serious than in 1929 cleared in roughly 18 months (so much for the years of misery). The massive intervention of givernment (often in precisely the ways Keynes suggested) prolonged the Depression for several years and prevented the clearing of failed investments that would, instead, have acheived the goal he ostensibly wanted.

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "They are caused solely by changes in the money supply relative to the supply of goods, not by "" Inflation is a general raise in price of goods and services. And deflation is a general decrease in the price of goods and services. When a market becomes saturated with the same goods the price drops And yes the trade in agricultural goods along with the feds increase in the discount rate is what cause the deflation. did you even go look at the numbers?

  • @cory35hogan
    @cory35hogan 12 років тому

    i completly understood his lecture and im not in any financial secture

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Again, the point made was in relative terms, which cannot be disputed.

  • @cocconut2y
    @cocconut2y 12 років тому

    I wish this guy was my lecturer.

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    Thank you. But I am simply regurgitating basic economic history. Not theory. Everything I said is accepted in every school. Notice not one of the economist i have quoted came from the Keynesian school. I used two Austrians (Rothbard and Higgs) to prove my points. I know the keynesian school has its problems but when people like this guy rewrite history it gets under my skin. Thanks again

  • @makeittrades5750
    @makeittrades5750 7 років тому +1

    awesome! Well done sir thank you!

  • @lousyindian
    @lousyindian 11 років тому

    except in this video i havent seen or read about the 'sharp break'/the 90 degree AS curve

  • @nicougrikify
    @nicougrikify 11 років тому

    where is the 'episode' after this ?

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    " (both were the result of monetary expansion that was unsustainable)" That is more nonsense. In The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s discount rate raised its discount rate to 4.75 percent in December 1919, to 6 percent in January 1920, and to 7 percent in June 1920. We both know that if you raise the discount rate that makes it harder for commercial banks to borrow money, which it turns decrease the money supply.

  • @brittanyavest
    @brittanyavest 7 років тому +1

    What is the next video after this one? Like the next one in order?

    • @TheWyvern66
      @TheWyvern66  7 років тому +1

      Try this:
      ua-cam.com/video/JSEB4GQqU-U/v-deo.html
      This will show more detail on what Keynes said we need to do . If you want to see his model mathematically, or if you have other areas of interest, please email me at my college: roger.strickland@sfcollege.edu
      :)

  • @lessatwi1
    @lessatwi1 11 років тому

    Brilliant. Last 2 minutes are a little rushed so may not be clear in first watch.

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    Yes I agree GDP is not best measurement of a country's economic health. It does not factor a lot of things like income equality. How ever we define depressions as a 10 percent drop in GDP. But with that being said Japan was out of the great depression by 1934

  • @Lisnageeragh
    @Lisnageeragh 11 років тому

    See Ireland SOME wages sticky down ...in certain sectors ...particularly aggregate wages....also SOME prices (Rents?) sticky down. Two ''economies'' Also liquidity trap phenomeon.

  • @zpeskin1
    @zpeskin1 10 років тому

    great stuff! Really helps

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    You need to adjust your punctuation placing a colon after "This is simply nonsense". Inflation/deflation are wholly MONETARY phenomena. They are caused solely by changes in the money supply relative to the supply of goods, not by "agricultural production in Europe". And that trade in agricultural goods was never of sufficient size to have the impact realized is .historical fact.

  • @akingofcrimson
    @akingofcrimson 12 років тому

    Very helpful, thank you!

  • @MegaPoetoe
    @MegaPoetoe 12 років тому

    u are better than my professor

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    As I didn't get ANY of those things wrong. The deflationary period came later, that the intervention in 1920 was negligible in comparison to later and began AFTER the turnaround is fact. The causes of the 1920 depression were precisely as I described and pretending that I was not discussing comparative to the Great Depression is a bald-faced lie (one of several).
    You are incapable of an honest discussion.

  • @TheSediqullah
    @TheSediqullah 12 років тому

    Dear sir,
    I was trying to send you an E-mail, but un fortunately i could not found any E-mail address of you, so i decided to comment of this of your video, I want to join the course of Economics in a university, and i had some doubt, so i wish you may clear it, My question is:
    there are three types of Economics namely 1-BSC.Economics, 2-BA.Economics, 3-BA.Economics(Hons), so would you please clarify the difference among these, Thanks a lot in advance.

  • @miryoungchung3645
    @miryoungchung3645 12 років тому

    really helpful!! thanks!

  • @lonwabosibejele2205
    @lonwabosibejele2205 11 років тому

    i love this guy

  • @garyhudson2017
    @garyhudson2017 12 років тому

    I agree he is good!

  • @lloydmorel8526
    @lloydmorel8526 10 років тому

    thanks

  • @dalooloo28
    @dalooloo28 9 років тому +1

    this is highly gorgeous

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "To .....to be anticipated" That is simply nonsense. Please go to the tradingeconomics web site and look up the deflation rates your self. Numbers don't lie. The deflation was caused by a European recovery in agricultural production in Europe. When primary commodity supplies from other countries were resumed after international shipping recovered, there was a great increase in the supply of commodities in America and their prices plummeted. That is just a historical fact

  • @athulcj3200
    @athulcj3200 5 років тому

    THANK U

  • @jsr9422
    @jsr9422 7 років тому

    3:06 John Mayer Keynes....i wonder if his body was a wonderland?

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    who said anything about bonds? The fact is americans had private saved 100 billion by 1944 including $43 billion in savings and money. (from The Consumer Interest: A Study in Consumer Economics) So yes the saving were available. Then as the war ended the pent up demand drove the economy as keynes predicted. But don't take his word for it here is Austrian economist Robert Higgs "Between 1945 and 1946, when personal consumption spending increased by $23.7 billion, continued....

  • @xolisalila8106
    @xolisalila8106 8 років тому

    Thank you

  • @MenkaRSgaming
    @MenkaRSgaming 11 років тому

    why can't all teachers be this clear...

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    Pt 1 To compare the recession of 1920 to the crash of 1929 is just ignorant. GNP fell 1% between 1919 and 1920 and 2% between 1920 and 1921. Also the deflationary period was anticipated among the businesses before 1920 how ever they did not have these same deflationary expectations prior to the 1929 crash. Also during the 1920' there were no major bank runs or collapses and the stock bubble of the 1920-1921 recession was not the result of excessive private debt and leveraged speculation.

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "As I didn't get ANY of those things wrong" So calling an 18 month recession short when the average recession during the keynesian era was 11 months is not considered wrong. wow ok dude

  • @shubzaa
    @shubzaa 12 років тому

    I second that.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Congratulations. You've gotten that completely wrong. Inflation and deflation are GENERAL (as in OVERALL) changes in prices. Absent a change in the money stock relative to goods available OVERALL, a price increase in any given area is OFFSET by decreases elsewhere in the economy. And no the trade in agricultural goods had NOTHING to do with inflation (international trade being a negligible percentage of the whole). Yes, I've looked at the numbers. They do not alter these points at all.

  • @richardmillar6342
    @richardmillar6342 11 років тому

    You seem to know what you are talking about. The other guy appears to be a sophist

  • @yuothineyesasian
    @yuothineyesasian 12 років тому

    D.

  • @sonjamcc8018
    @sonjamcc8018 11 років тому

    classical

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    The elimination of the gold standard made it a lot easier for governments to print and spend money. That is why the earlier a nation got of the gold standard the earlier the great depression ended. (Germany and Japan are two examples) Yes, Keynesian era buffer stocks 1945-1973. the concept of people saving up during the war (which they famously did) and spending goods after the war is nonsense? lmao Oh and the first SS payments when out in 1937 ;) try again dude lmfaooo

  • @ymkamara420
    @ymkamara420 11 років тому

    "And yet NONE of those recessions (no depressions) was as steep" The was due to the Keynesian buffer stocks, the elimination of the gold standard, strong regulations, automatic stabilizers and countercyclical fiscal policies. And as far as cuts in 1946 goes "Keynes harshly rejected the risk of post-war stagnation, holding that because of Social security there would be a large reduction in private saving and so that would be no problem” try again dude. lmfaooooo

  • @jacekpe6022
    @jacekpe6022 11 років тому

    its a (fail)sian economy thumbs for austrian economy.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Yes, the expenditure of savings/bonds on non-investment (wartime activities) was not the same thing economically as "savings" and were thus NOT available for spending after the war. And that the first SS payments went out in 1937 is completely meaningless. The percentage of the funds collected into SS that were available for expenditure immediately after the was microscopic. Do you enjoy laughing as you are pwned? Fire your incompetent fact checker.

  • @FletchforFreedom
    @FletchforFreedom 11 років тому

    Again, you fail the most obvious test. The crash occurred in 1920!!! All the problems you are discussing about actions in 1921 and later could (obviously) NOT have caused the crash so they are pointless. And even the beginning of the deflationary period PRECEDES the raising of the discount rate (as the bust of the bubble was related to the creation of the bubble in the first place not subsequent discount rate adjustment).
    Keep laughing as you embarrass yourself further.

  • @AyJay2303
    @AyJay2303 12 років тому

    he didn't make any sense...