• http://zachriel.blogspot.com/2005/07/liberal-v-conservative.html Zachriel

    Danny Lemieux: Very well done, very clever.

    Yes. Very much so.

    Could’ve been a bit better if it had actually been more balanced, though. Then it could have also been a general commentary of society at large, rather than a parochial economic polemic. For instance, Keynesianism is a market-based theory, but they presented it as strictly top-down, which isn’t the case. Hayek’s points about the problem of bailing out losers is important, but again, doesn’t really address Keynes’s argument. It’s a fact that markets can fail spectacularly, and then take inordinate time to recover. The pain of an economic depression is far too great and vast to ignore, and will lead to political instability, such as in Germany between the wars. A more balanced view would have shown them talking past each other more, as they are both right in some ways.