WEBVTT

NOTE 16. Confusions About Capital

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:08.000
Chapter 16. Confusions about capital.

2
00:00:08.000 --> 00:00:12.000
Ongoing without dinner.

3
00:00:12.000 --> 00:00:27.000
As we advance in the general theory, the fallacies seem to be crowded in more tightly, and in Chapter 16, sundry observations on the nature of capital, they become particularly thick.

4
00:00:27.000 --> 00:00:37.000
An act of individual saving means, so to speak, Keynes begins, a decision not to have dinner today.

5
00:00:37.000 --> 00:00:45.000
The matter is obviously put this way in order to make an act of saving appear to be inherently absurd.

6
00:00:45.000 --> 00:00:52.000
The truth is that an act of individual saving means, for the overwhelming majority of savers,

7
00:00:52.000 --> 00:00:56.000
merely a decision not to have two dinners today.

8
00:00:56.000 --> 00:01:02.400
It is much more sensible all around to put aside enough to make sure that one also has

9
00:01:02.400 --> 00:01:04.640
a dinner tomorrow.

10
00:01:04.640 --> 00:01:07.880
But let us resume the quotation.

11
00:01:07.880 --> 00:01:14.580
An active individual saving means, so to speak, a decision not to have dinner today, but it

12
00:01:14.580 --> 00:01:20.700
does not necessitate a decision to have dinner or to buy a pair of boots a week hence or

13
00:01:20.700 --> 00:01:26.620
or a year hence, or to consume any specified thing at any specified date.

14
00:01:26.620 --> 00:01:33.020
Thus, it depresses the business of preparing today's dinner without stimulating the business

15
00:01:33.020 --> 00:01:36.900
of making ready for some future act of consumption.

16
00:01:36.900 --> 00:01:42.660
It is not a substitution of future consumption demand for present consumption demand.

17
00:01:42.660 --> 00:01:45.900
It is a net diminution of such demand.

18
00:01:45.900 --> 00:01:51.340
Page 210 On the basis of Keynes's own formal definitions

19
00:01:51.340 --> 00:01:58.080
of saving and investment earlier in the General Theory, according to which, they are necessarily

20
00:01:58.080 --> 00:02:04.780
equal in amount, being for the community as a whole merely different aspects of the same

21
00:02:04.780 --> 00:02:12.380
thing, page 74, this whole passage is nonsensical and self-contradictory.

22
00:02:12.380 --> 00:02:19.540
We can make sense of it only if we redefine saving merely as non-spending of money.

23
00:02:19.540 --> 00:02:26.060
Even then, the passage is conditionally true, only in a very restricted sense.

24
00:02:26.060 --> 00:02:32.960
In order to make it true, we must throw our italics not on the word not, but on the word

25
00:02:32.960 --> 00:02:35.540
necessitate.

26
00:02:35.540 --> 00:02:41.900
An act of saving does not necessitate a future act of consumption, particularly if it is

27
00:02:41.900 --> 00:02:55.900
is accompanied or followed by an equivalent act of deflation, i.e., an actual cancellation or disappearance of the amount of money saved, and if prices and wages are rigid.

28
00:02:55.900 --> 00:03:09.900
But in the modern economic world, an act of saving, if it is not followed within a month or so by an equivalent spending, is almost invariably accompanied or followed by an act of investment.

29
00:03:09.900 --> 00:03:19.900
This is merely a way of saying that people in a modern economic community do not simply hoard money in a sock or under the mattress.

30
00:03:19.900 --> 00:03:27.900
Even if they merely deposit it in a checking account, the great bulk of it is immediately loaned out by the bank.

31
00:03:27.900 --> 00:03:33.900
If they deposit it in a savings account, the whole of it is invested for them.

32
00:03:33.900 --> 00:03:40.840
Moreover, Keynes continues, the expectation of future consumption is so largely based

33
00:03:40.840 --> 00:03:46.800
on current experience of present consumption that a reduction in the latter is likely to

34
00:03:46.800 --> 00:03:52.400
depress the former, with the result that the act of saving will not merely depress the

35
00:03:52.400 --> 00:03:59.300
price of consumption goods and leave the marginal efficiency of existing capital unaffected,

36
00:03:59.300 --> 00:04:03.260
but may actually tend to depress the latter also.

37
00:04:03.260 --> 00:04:10.340
In this event, it may reduce present investment demand as well as present consumption demand.

38
00:04:10.340 --> 00:04:15.260
Page 210 Even Keynes, one might suppose, would have

39
00:04:15.260 --> 00:04:22.420
stopped at this point to re-examine either his premises or his paradoxical conclusion.

40
00:04:22.420 --> 00:04:29.380
For what he is saying is that though saving and investment are necessarily equal, increased

41
00:04:29.380 --> 00:04:33.700
Increased saving may mean decreased investment.

42
00:04:33.700 --> 00:04:39.140
Before we examine the basic fallacy here, however, we may pause a moment to point out

43
00:04:39.140 --> 00:04:40.980
a secondary fallacy.

44
00:04:40.980 --> 00:04:46.900
In the passage just quoted, Keynes is tacitly assuming, not merely that there have been

45
00:04:46.900 --> 00:04:53.980
acts of saving, but there has suddenly been more saving in the immediate past.

46
00:04:53.980 --> 00:05:00.740
For if, let us say, people in a given community had previously spent 90% of their incomes

47
00:05:00.740 --> 00:05:08.620
on consumption and set aside 10% for savings investment, both consumption goods and production

48
00:05:08.620 --> 00:05:15.140
goods entrepreneurs would have adjusted their operations to this distribution.

49
00:05:15.140 --> 00:05:21.140
Consumption goods producers would have expected to sell, say, only 90 units of goods in a

50
00:05:21.140 --> 00:05:47.140
saving at the same rate as in the past would do nothing to disturb the existing balance, only if savings, say, were suddenly doubled and consumers only bought 80 units of consumption goods where they had previously bought 90, would the consumption industries be disturbed.

51
00:05:47.140 --> 00:05:56.140
The assumption of a sudden increase in saving, in fact, is the only one that makes sense out of Keynes's conclusions.

52
00:05:56.140 --> 00:06:03.140
That this is what he does tacitly assume is brought out by a remark on the following page.

53
00:06:03.140 --> 00:06:13.140
An individual decision to save does not, in actual fact, involve the placing of any specific forward order for consumption,

54
00:06:13.140 --> 00:06:18.900
but merely the cancellation of a present order, page 211.

55
00:06:18.900 --> 00:06:24.420
As John Stuart Mill pointed out more than a century ago in dealing with precisely this

56
00:06:24.420 --> 00:06:31.260
fallacy about saving, this is confounding the effects arising from the mere suddenness

57
00:06:31.260 --> 00:06:37.700
of a change with the effects of the change itself, but even this assumption of a net

58
00:06:37.700 --> 00:06:44.500
increase in the rate of saving, or rather of a net decrease in the rate of consumption

59
00:06:44.500 --> 00:06:48.420
is not enough to make sense out of Keynes's conclusion.

60
00:06:48.420 --> 00:06:54.780
We must also assume that what is saved is not invested as it normally would be.

61
00:06:54.780 --> 00:07:02.780
For if, in the new situation, only 80% of income were spent on consumption but 20% instead

62
00:07:02.780 --> 00:07:09.420
of Ten went into investment, the capital goods industries would be stimulated sufficiently

63
00:07:09.420 --> 00:07:16.640
to absorb any unemployment in the consumption goods industries, and future income would

64
00:07:16.640 --> 00:07:19.560
be even greater than otherwise.

65
00:07:19.560 --> 00:07:26.400
The only assumption on which Keynes's conclusions can be justified is that the increased savings

66
00:07:26.400 --> 00:07:32.260
Bankings would mean merely increased money hoardings, accompanied by rigid prices and

67
00:07:32.260 --> 00:07:39.840
wage rates, and this would happen only in a period when the expectations of consumers

68
00:07:39.840 --> 00:07:46.280
were bearish, either regarding the future price of durable consumer goods, or their

69
00:07:46.280 --> 00:07:51.480
own prospects of continued employment, or both.

70
00:07:51.480 --> 00:07:58.540
The absurd, though almost universal idea that an act of individual saving is just as good

71
00:07:58.540 --> 00:08:05.160
for effective demand as an act of individual consumption has been fostered by the fallacy

72
00:08:05.160 --> 00:08:11.880
much more specious than the conclusion derived from it that an increased desire to hold wealth,

73
00:08:11.880 --> 00:08:18.100
being much the same thing as an increased desire to hold investments, must, by increasing

74
00:08:18.100 --> 00:08:41.860
Now, this absurd idea is in fact a true description of what normally happens, because normally

75
00:08:41.860 --> 00:08:45.420
an act of saving is an act of investment.

76
00:08:45.420 --> 00:09:05.420
If a man does nothing else than deposit his weekly salary check in his commercial bank account, for example, and draw out only part of the amount to pay his bills and meet his current expenses, the bank will normally lend out at short term, say, about four-fifths of the deposit.

77
00:09:05.420 --> 00:09:12.660
If the same man deposits part of his weekly salary in a savings account, the savings bank

78
00:09:12.660 --> 00:09:18.820
will lend out at long term almost the entire deposit.

79
00:09:18.820 --> 00:09:24.620
Saving and investment, using both terms in their unsophisticated senses, normally go

80
00:09:24.620 --> 00:09:29.980
together and are normally part of the same completed transaction.

81
00:09:29.980 --> 00:09:36.180
When trying to prove that this is not so, Keynes resorts to reasoning so tortured that

82
00:09:36.180 --> 00:09:40.180
it becomes almost impossible to follow it.

83
00:09:40.180 --> 00:09:46.740
This fallacy, he tells us, comes from believing that the owner of wealth desires a capital

84
00:09:46.740 --> 00:09:53.300
asset as such, whereas what he really desires is its prospective yield.

85
00:09:53.300 --> 00:09:55.420
page 212.

86
00:09:55.420 --> 00:10:01.020
This distinction, in connection with this particular line of argument, has more subtlety

87
00:10:01.020 --> 00:10:02.660
than point.

88
00:10:02.660 --> 00:10:08.780
It is equivalent to observing shrewdly that what a concert audience really goes to hear

89
00:10:08.780 --> 00:10:11.860
is not the piano, but its sound.

90
00:10:11.860 --> 00:10:17.900
The distinction is no less true, in fact, of consumption than of capital goods.

91
00:10:17.900 --> 00:10:24.580
We buy or rent a house, an automobile, or a piano, for the services that we get out

92
00:10:24.580 --> 00:10:31.820
of it, and the yield of capital goods, like the yield of consumption goods, is not necessarily

93
00:10:31.820 --> 00:10:36.900
a physical product, but a service, a value.

94
00:10:36.900 --> 00:10:43.500
The yield of a railroad or a truck, like the yield of a pleasure car, consists in the value

95
00:10:43.500 --> 00:10:46.060
added by transportation.

96
00:10:46.060 --> 00:10:52.260
The yield of an office building, like the yield of a residence, consists in shelter,

97
00:10:52.260 --> 00:10:59.060
heat, convenience of location, attractiveness and impressiveness of appearance, and other

98
00:10:59.060 --> 00:11:03.780
services, both tangible and intangible.

99
00:11:03.780 --> 00:11:07.780
Capital goods yield a monetary income.

100
00:11:07.780 --> 00:11:10.620
Consumer goods yield directly.

101
00:11:10.620 --> 00:11:13.780
Capital goods yield a money income.

102
00:11:13.780 --> 00:11:18.340
Power Goods Directly Yield and Enjoyment Income

103
00:11:18.340 --> 00:11:24.660
One of Keynes's own major fallacies is his assumption that yield must mean a physical

104
00:11:24.660 --> 00:11:28.720
yield rather than a value yield.

105
00:11:28.720 --> 00:11:34.280
That is why he embraces the medieval notion that money is barren.

106
00:11:34.280 --> 00:11:40.380
That is why he persistently fails to recognize that people wish to hold cash not because

107
00:11:40.380 --> 00:11:47.260
Because of some wholly irrational or antisocial liquidity preference, but because of the yield

108
00:11:47.260 --> 00:11:50.840
they expect from holding cash.

109
00:11:50.840 --> 00:11:56.480
This yield may consist in the ability not only to make immediate purchases, but to take

110
00:11:56.480 --> 00:11:59.680
advantage of future opportunities.

111
00:11:59.680 --> 00:12:06.740
Or cash may be held speculatively in the expectation of a rise in the purchasing power of money.

112
00:12:06.740 --> 00:12:13.620
Or what is the same thing in the expectation of a fall in the price of durable goods?

113
00:12:13.620 --> 00:12:21.420
Nor is this speculative holding of money, as Keynes constantly implies, wicked or antisocial,

114
00:12:21.420 --> 00:12:27.140
simply because it does not go immediately into purchasing consumption goods at excessive

115
00:12:27.140 --> 00:12:31.620
prices or making unprofitable investments.

116
00:12:31.620 --> 00:12:37.940
If the speculative holders of money are right in their expectations, they perform a social

117
00:12:37.940 --> 00:12:45.900
function by refusing to waste resources unprofitably, and by forcing a quicker return to more realistic

118
00:12:45.900 --> 00:12:48.740
and workable price and wage relationships.

119
00:12:48.740 --> 00:12:56.100
It is those who persist in holding wage rates and prices at excessive and unworkable levels

120
00:12:56.100 --> 00:12:59.780
who are acting antisocially.

121
00:12:59.780 --> 00:13:06.260
After telling us that the owner of wealth does not desire a capital asset as such, but

122
00:13:06.260 --> 00:13:10.740
only its prospective yield, Keynes goes on,

123
00:13:10.740 --> 00:13:17.740
Now, prospective yield wholly depends on the expectation of future effective demand in

124
00:13:17.740 --> 00:13:20.580
relation to future conditions of supply.

125
00:13:20.580 --> 00:13:27.260
If, therefore, an act of saving does nothing to improve prospective yield, it does nothing

126
00:13:27.260 --> 00:13:29.260
to stimulate investment.

127
00:13:29.260 --> 00:13:31.960
Page 212

128
00:13:31.960 --> 00:13:34.980
This is a strangely inverted argument.

129
00:13:34.980 --> 00:13:41.580
An act of saving is not undertaken to improve prospective yield, but to take advantage of

130
00:13:41.580 --> 00:13:43.460
prospective yield.

131
00:13:43.460 --> 00:13:49.240
Saving, somewhere, is indispensable to equivalent investment.

132
00:13:49.240 --> 00:13:55.740
Saving represents the supply of the funds needed to satisfy investment demand.

133
00:13:55.740 --> 00:14:02.620
Every manufacturer or seller knows that when by production or offer he increases the supply

134
00:14:02.620 --> 00:14:09.320
of a commodity, he does not thereby raise its price or increase the demand for it.

135
00:14:09.320 --> 00:14:14.640
The supplier is merely taking advantage of the existing price and demand.

136
00:14:14.640 --> 00:14:18.400
He is helping to meet the existing demand.

137
00:14:18.400 --> 00:14:24.880
The actual effect of his own action, indeed, is to tend to lower the price and to reduce

138
00:14:24.880 --> 00:14:35.040
Earlier in the general theory, as we have seen, Keynes compares saving and investment

139
00:14:35.040 --> 00:14:41.520
to selling and buying respectively, and reminds us of the elementary proposition that there

140
00:14:41.520 --> 00:14:48.480
cannot be a buyer without a seller, or a seller without a buyer, page 85.

141
00:14:48.480 --> 00:14:55.400
But in the foregoing argument from page 212, he does in fact assume that there can be selling

142
00:14:55.400 --> 00:14:59.720
without buying, saving without investment.

143
00:14:59.720 --> 00:15:06.140
Keynes's argument on this point shuttles back and forth so much, in fact, and seems to reverse

144
00:15:06.140 --> 00:15:12.560
its direction so often, that the task not merely of answering it, but even of saying

145
00:15:12.560 --> 00:15:16.560
what it is, often appears hopeless.

146
00:15:16.560 --> 00:15:22.960
Immediately after he has treated saving, in effect, as a one-sided operation, like selling

147
00:15:22.960 --> 00:15:29.920
without buying, he insists with his own italics on calling it two-sided.

148
00:15:29.920 --> 00:15:33.700
But two-sided is a rather strange way.

149
00:15:33.700 --> 00:15:35.200
To quote,

150
00:15:35.200 --> 00:15:41.480
Moreover, in order that an individual saver may attain his desired goal of the ownership

151
00:16:11.480 --> 00:16:26.480
Page 212

152
00:16:26.480 --> 00:16:32.720
I find it impossible to make head or tail of this argument, or to read any sense into

153
00:16:32.720 --> 00:16:33.840
it.

154
00:16:33.840 --> 00:16:36.680
Every sentence of it seems to be wrong.

155
00:16:36.680 --> 00:16:43.960
An act of net saving by any individual must involve the creation of a new capital asset.

156
00:16:43.960 --> 00:16:51.240
If it fails to do so, if it is in fact a mere transfer of an existing capital asset, say,

157
00:16:51.240 --> 00:16:57.720
a stock or a bond, then the only reason it does not lead to the creation of a new capital

158
00:16:57.720 --> 00:17:05.040
asset is that it must be offset by an exactly equivalent act of dissaving on the part of

159
00:17:05.040 --> 00:17:11.420
of some other individual, either the person who sells the saver the existing capital asset

160
00:17:11.420 --> 00:17:14.240
or some other person.

161
00:17:14.240 --> 00:17:20.320
But if there is no offsetting act of de-saving elsewhere, then a net addition to saving by

162
00:17:20.320 --> 00:17:25.620
anybody must mean the creation of a new capital asset.

163
00:17:25.620 --> 00:17:32.740
It is, moreover, impossible to see how a saver forces some other individual to transfer some

164
00:17:32.740 --> 00:17:43.060
A man who earns a wage of $100 a week and saves $10 out of it has not forced his employer

165
00:17:43.060 --> 00:17:45.880
to transfer this $10 to him.

166
00:17:45.880 --> 00:17:48.180
He has earned it for his services.

167
00:17:48.180 --> 00:17:52.060
He has produced an equivalent value in return.

168
00:17:52.060 --> 00:17:58.100
And if he has not forced this $10 out of his employer, it is impossible to say from whom

169
00:17:58.100 --> 00:18:00.060
he has forced it.

170
00:18:00.060 --> 00:18:04.020
If he has not stolen it, he has given an equivalent.

171
00:18:04.020 --> 00:18:08.420
The buyer does not force a transfer of goods from the seller.

172
00:18:08.420 --> 00:18:12.900
The seller does not force a transfer of money from the buyer.

173
00:18:12.900 --> 00:18:17.860
It is impossible to make any sense out of such a form of statement.

174
00:18:17.860 --> 00:18:23.540
But if it is impossible to say with confidence what Keynes means in this paragraph, it is

175
00:18:23.540 --> 00:18:26.200
not impossible to guess.

176
00:18:26.200 --> 00:18:33.160
These errors come mainly from using the terms saving and investment in many different senses,

177
00:18:33.160 --> 00:18:37.060
several of which are mutually contradictory.

178
00:18:37.060 --> 00:18:42.920
If we define saving and investment as Keynes formally defines them in Chapter 6 of the

179
00:18:42.920 --> 00:18:50.400
General Theory, in which both terms mean merely unconsumed output, then they are not merely

180
00:18:50.400 --> 00:18:57.320
equal but identical, and the whole of Keynes's subsequent discussion of the difference between

181
00:18:57.320 --> 00:18:59.740
them is invalid.

182
00:18:59.740 --> 00:19:05.480
If saving, however, is thought of purely in terms of hoarded money, and investment is

183
00:19:05.480 --> 00:19:12.200
thought of purely in terms of capital goods, excluding money, then there is, of course,

184
00:19:12.200 --> 00:19:14.280
a difference between them.

185
00:19:14.280 --> 00:19:19.880
But it does not follow that Keynes's reasoning, even on these foregoing definitions, which

186
00:19:19.880 --> 00:19:23.720
which he never makes explicitly, is valid.

187
00:19:23.720 --> 00:19:26.160
For Keynes, 1.

188
00:19:26.160 --> 00:19:31.400
Constantly writes as if the man who holds money holds nothing of real value.

189
00:19:31.400 --> 00:19:32.600
2.

190
00:19:32.600 --> 00:19:38.480
Never tells the reader whether in any particular case he is assuming a constant or a changing

191
00:19:38.480 --> 00:19:40.080
money supply.

192
00:19:40.080 --> 00:19:41.340
And 3.

193
00:19:41.340 --> 00:19:47.640
Never tells the reader whether in any particular case he is assuming flexible or rigid prices

194
00:19:47.640 --> 00:19:56.040
and Wage Rates Saving, Investment and Money Supply

195
00:19:56.040 --> 00:20:02.720
If Keynes is assuming a constant money supply, then an act of saving by any individual or

196
00:20:02.720 --> 00:20:10.600
group, when saving means solely money-saving, must necessarily be offset by an act of dis-saving

197
00:20:10.600 --> 00:20:14.160
by some other individual or group.

198
00:20:14.160 --> 00:20:20.840
For if the money supply is constant, the average cash holding cannot be increased.

199
00:20:20.840 --> 00:20:27.160
If under such conditions, the majority of people suddenly attempt to save more, then

200
00:20:27.160 --> 00:20:33.280
the initial result must be that producers, and nearly all families are producers as well

201
00:20:33.280 --> 00:20:38.180
as consumers, will buy less of each other's goods.

202
00:20:38.180 --> 00:20:45.180
It is only in these suddenly changed specific conditions, and for such an assumed initial period,

203
00:20:45.180 --> 00:20:51.180
that the predicted Keynesian result of unemployment would take place as a consequence,

204
00:20:51.180 --> 00:20:54.180
not of saving, but of attempted saving.

205
00:20:54.180 --> 00:21:00.180
And even this consequence is possible only under the further assumption

206
00:21:00.180 --> 00:21:06.180
that prices or wage rates are sticky or inflexible in a downward direction.

207
00:21:06.180 --> 00:21:28.180
For if prices and wage rates are fluid in both directions, the immediate response to a falling off in the desire to buy goods, or to hire workers, would be a lowering of prices or wage rates to a point where people would cease to attempt to save more than before, and would consent to make their usual purchases again.

208
00:21:28.180 --> 00:21:43.180
In any case, the reduced supply of money offered would now be sufficient to buy the previous volume of goods, and to employ the previous number of workers at the now lower prices and wages.

209
00:21:43.180 --> 00:21:53.180
But this analysis reminds us that even when the Keynes unemployment effect takes place, Keynes is accusing the wrong factor of being the culprit.

210
00:21:53.180 --> 00:22:00.180
The real culprit is not saving, but wages and prices that are inflexible in a downward direction.

211
00:22:00.180 --> 00:22:09.180
And even the saving, of which Keynes complains, is not saving or even an attempt to save in the ordinary sense.

212
00:22:09.180 --> 00:22:21.180
It is an attempt to hold money rather than goods, in the expectation that the purchasing power of money will go up, i.e. that the price of goods will go down.

213
00:22:21.180 --> 00:22:27.820
But even here it is not the attempted saving, or rather the attempted hoarding, that is

214
00:22:27.820 --> 00:22:29.860
the cause of the downturn.

215
00:22:29.860 --> 00:22:36.300
It is the expectation of the downturn that causes the attempted hoarding.

216
00:22:36.300 --> 00:22:42.540
And the expectation of the downturn is caused, in turn, by the belief that prices or wage

217
00:22:42.540 --> 00:22:48.220
rates, or both, are excessive at levels unlikely to be maintained.

218
00:22:48.220 --> 00:23:00.220
Keynes's sarcastic shafts, however, are never directed against inflexible or excessive wage rates, but only against the attempted saving that they provoke.

219
00:23:00.220 --> 00:23:13.220
We must come to the conclusion, then, that under the assumption of a constant money supply, saving and investment are necessarily at all times equal, and grow pari passu.

220
00:23:13.220 --> 00:23:33.220
Savers invest either directly or indirectly. They either use their savings to buy stocks or bonds or mortgages or houses or other durable goods, or they deposit their funds in savings or checking accounts which the banks invest for them or lend out on short term.

221
00:23:33.220 --> 00:23:41.220
Some savers may, of course, invest in more pocketbook cash, but only at the expense of others.

222
00:23:41.220 --> 00:23:49.220
Under the assumption of a constant money supply, there cannot be a net increase in average cash holdings.

223
00:23:49.220 --> 00:24:00.220
Yet many modern economists do distinguish between saving and investment, and do talk of inequalities between saving and investment.

224
00:24:00.220 --> 00:24:07.180
And this distinction, when properly made and understood, is not only valid, but constitutes

225
00:24:07.180 --> 00:24:11.340
an important and necessary tool of analysis.

226
00:24:11.340 --> 00:24:16.740
The best way to show this is to analyze Keynes's argument, denying it.

227
00:24:16.740 --> 00:24:23.720
Keynes, as we have seen, is bewilderingly inconsistent on this point, assuming in books

228
00:24:23.720 --> 00:24:31.160
3, 4, 5, and 6, and in a grossly exaggerated degree, the very difference he has been at

229
00:24:31.160 --> 00:24:34.600
such pains to deny in Book 2.

230
00:24:34.600 --> 00:24:42.240
In Book 2, he explicitly rejects the new-fangled view that there can be saving without investment

231
00:24:42.240 --> 00:24:46.040
or investment without genuine saving.

232
00:24:46.040 --> 00:24:50.480
Page 83 The argument by which he does this is lengthy

233
00:24:50.480 --> 00:25:02.160
The prevalence of the idea that saving and investment, taken in their straightforward

234
00:25:02.160 --> 00:25:08.360
sense, can differ from one another, is to be explained, I think, by an optical illusion

235
00:25:08.360 --> 00:25:14.440
due to regarding an individual depositor's relation to his bank as being a one-sided

236
00:25:14.440 --> 00:25:21.440
Transaction, instead of seeing it as the two-sided transaction which it actually is.

237
00:25:21.440 --> 00:25:27.760
It is supposed that a depositor and his bank can somehow contrive between them to perform

238
00:25:27.760 --> 00:25:33.360
an operation by which savings can disappear into the banking system, so that they are

239
00:25:33.360 --> 00:25:39.860
lost to investment, or, contrary-wise, that the banking system can make it impossible

240
00:25:39.860 --> 00:25:46.820
Possible for Investment to Occur to Which No Saving Corresponds, page 81

241
00:25:46.820 --> 00:25:52.480
Now this is precisely what a depositor and his bank can contrive to do.

242
00:25:52.480 --> 00:25:58.380
The way in which the banking system can make it possible for investment to occur to which

243
00:25:58.380 --> 00:26:04.580
no saving corresponds is easier to describe, so we shall begin with it.

244
00:26:04.580 --> 00:26:11.060
A big manufacturer comes to his bank with a proposition to put up a new plant, and the

245
00:26:11.060 --> 00:26:18.060
bank, because it has faith in his judgment or shares his optimism, advances him $1 million

246
00:26:18.060 --> 00:26:19.580
toward it.

247
00:26:19.580 --> 00:26:26.060
It does this by creating a deposit credit of $1 million against which he is free to

248
00:26:26.060 --> 00:26:27.060
draw.

249
00:26:27.060 --> 00:26:34.420
Thus, $1 million of monetary purchasing power has been newly created.

250
00:26:34.420 --> 00:26:40.500
Let us assume that it constitutes a new addition to the outstanding supply of money and bank

251
00:26:40.500 --> 00:26:42.140
credit.

252
00:26:42.140 --> 00:26:45.500
This sum is invested in the plant.

253
00:26:45.500 --> 00:26:48.900
Investment has increased by one million dollars.

254
00:26:48.900 --> 00:26:55.120
This increase is represented by a physical asset, which we shall assume is a net addition

255
00:26:55.120 --> 00:26:58.220
to the supply of capital instruments.

256
00:26:58.220 --> 00:27:01.680
The increase in investment, then, is real.

257
00:27:01.680 --> 00:27:07.540
But there has also suddenly come into being one million dollars of new cash.

258
00:27:07.540 --> 00:27:09.960
Is this a genuine saving?

259
00:27:09.960 --> 00:27:13.080
Keynes insists that it is.

260
00:27:13.080 --> 00:27:17.840
The notion that the creation of credit by the banking system allows investment to take

261
00:27:17.840 --> 00:27:25.040
place to which no genuine saving corresponds can only be the result of isolating one of

262
00:27:25.040 --> 00:27:35.680
The Savings Which Result are just as genuine as any other savings.

263
00:27:35.680 --> 00:27:40.840
No one can be compelled to own the additional money corresponding to the new bank credit

264
00:27:40.840 --> 00:27:51.320
unless he deliberately prefers to hold more money rather than some other form of wealth.

265
00:27:51.320 --> 00:27:56.300
But this is a very Pickwickian definition of genuine savings.

266
00:27:56.300 --> 00:28:01.280
The bank creates a cash balance by writing a credit on its books.

267
00:28:01.280 --> 00:28:08.340
And lo, this becomes new savings, and just as genuine as any other savings because somebody

268
00:28:08.340 --> 00:28:11.140
must hold the new cash balance.

269
00:28:11.140 --> 00:28:17.380
On this definition, we create new savings as genuine as any other savings simply by

270
00:28:17.380 --> 00:28:20.280
expanding the credit supply.

271
00:28:20.280 --> 00:28:26.460
From the same reasoning we can create any amount of new savings we wish overnight, simply by

272
00:28:26.460 --> 00:28:32.240
printing that amount of new paper money because somebody will necessarily hold that new paper

273
00:28:32.240 --> 00:28:33.240
money.

274
00:28:33.240 --> 00:28:39.360
It is only by rejecting this whole perversion of words and meanings that we are able to make

275
00:28:39.360 --> 00:28:44.520
any sense at all of the general theory after book two.

276
00:28:44.520 --> 00:28:50.600
For then we find that Keynes's fear of savings and praise of investment follow because of

277
00:28:50.600 --> 00:28:57.860
his constant assumption that these two words not only refer to two quite distinct things,

278
00:28:57.860 --> 00:29:03.240
but that savings and investment are constantly likely to be unequal.

279
00:29:03.240 --> 00:29:09.000
And when we analyze how this inequality can come about, we uncover the hidden assumption

280
00:29:09.000 --> 00:29:14.600
that gives to the Keynesian system whatever plausibility it may have.

281
00:29:14.600 --> 00:29:20.480
Under the assumption of a constant money supply, as we have seen, saving and investment are

282
00:29:20.480 --> 00:29:25.060
necessarily at all times equal and move together.

283
00:29:25.060 --> 00:29:31.480
But when new money and bank credit are created by, say, new bank borrowings to construct

284
00:29:31.480 --> 00:29:38.760
new plants, investment increases without any corresponding increase in ordinary saving.

285
00:29:38.760 --> 00:29:45.180
This may be put the other way. When investment exceeds genuine saving, it is because new

286
00:29:45.180 --> 00:29:52.640
money and bank credit are being created. In short, when investment exceeds genuine saving,

287
00:29:52.640 --> 00:30:01.440
it is because we are in a period of inflation. Contrary wise, in a crisis or period of liquidation,

288
00:30:01.440 --> 00:30:07.560
bank loans are being repaid and not renewed. The money supply is shrinking, and ordinary

289
00:30:07.560 --> 00:30:19.220
In short, when genuine saving exceeds investment, it is because we are in a period of deflation.

290
00:30:19.220 --> 00:30:25.780
To put it still another way, an excess of prior saving over subsequent investment, when

291
00:30:25.780 --> 00:30:32.280
we use these terms in their monetary or monetary value sense, and not both in the technical

292
00:30:32.280 --> 00:30:41.960
is but another way of describing deflation, and an excess of investment over prior saving

293
00:30:41.960 --> 00:30:45.720
is but another way of describing inflation.

294
00:30:45.720 --> 00:30:52.160
As long as there is an equality of genuine saving and investment, using both terms in

295
00:30:52.160 --> 00:30:59.440
their monetary or monetary value sense, there is neither inflation nor deflation.

296
00:30:59.440 --> 00:31:07.080
Of course, there is always and under all conditions simultaneous equality of saving and investment,

297
00:31:07.080 --> 00:31:14.320
i.e. equality at any one moment of time, but there is often inequality between prior saving

298
00:31:14.320 --> 00:31:21.720
and subsequent investment, using both terms in a monetary or monetary value sense.

299
00:31:21.720 --> 00:31:27.480
And this inequality between saving at one moment and investment at another moment is

300
00:31:27.480 --> 00:31:36.480
is usually the consequence rather than the cause of the monetary deflation or inflation that must necessarily accompany it.

301
00:31:36.480 --> 00:31:48.480
So the harmfulness of saving, on which Keynes expatiates so often, and the blessings and necessity of investment, on which he is equally eloquent,

302
00:31:48.480 --> 00:31:55.480
do not follow from the absolute amount of either savings or investment in themselves.

303
00:31:55.480 --> 00:32:13.480
But from the unstated assumption that one exceeds the other, if an excess of saving over investment means deflation, then there is no trick and no revolutionary new economics in proving that it causes deflation.

304
00:32:13.480 --> 00:32:22.480
And if an excess of investment over saving means inflation, it is supererogatory to prove that it causes inflation.

305
00:32:22.480 --> 00:32:38.480
The whole Keynesian policy is a policy of averting, at any cost, deflation of any amount, and courting almost any risk of perpetual inflation in order to maintain perpetual, full employment.

306
00:32:38.480 --> 00:33:07.480
And the whole Keynesian theoretical system rests, among other tricks or errors, on ignoring the fact that, with a constant money supply, all saving implies an equal amount of investment, and assuming instead, that there is a constant tendency for saving to exceed investment, unless the government bureaucracy as constantly steps in to dream up and order enough investment to fill the gap.

307
00:33:08.480 --> 00:33:12.480
Roundabout Production

308
00:33:12.480 --> 00:33:18.480
Section 2 of Chapter 16 contains a number of curious non-sequiturs,

309
00:33:18.480 --> 00:33:22.480
which it hardly seems profitable to stop to straighten out.

310
00:33:22.480 --> 00:33:26.480
The section is noteworthy chiefly because it repeats the criticism

311
00:33:26.480 --> 00:33:30.480
that Marshall made of Boehm-Bawerk in a footnote.

312
00:33:30.480 --> 00:33:36.480
I have already anticipated this criticism in my previous chapter, page 212,

313
00:33:36.480 --> 00:33:41.680
but it may be worthwhile to examine it in the form in which it is stated by Keynes.

314
00:33:41.680 --> 00:33:49.480
It is true, he writes, that some lengthy or roundabout processes are physically efficient,

315
00:33:49.480 --> 00:33:52.900
but so are some short processes.

316
00:33:52.900 --> 00:33:57.700
Lengthy processes are not physically efficient because they are long.

317
00:33:57.700 --> 00:34:00.040
Page 214.

318
00:34:00.040 --> 00:34:10.040
This is true, but first of all, what counts in economics is not physical efficiency or productivity, but value productivity.

319
00:34:10.040 --> 00:34:20.040
And because the precise causal relationship between roundabout processes and production was sometimes misleadingly stated by Boehm-Bawerk,

320
00:34:20.040 --> 00:34:36.040
It does not follow that the length or roundaboutness of the productive process is irrelevant, or that the Bamboverkian analysis is useless, as Keynes, page 176, and Marshall supposed.

321
00:34:36.040 --> 00:34:48.040
It is the expected greater value-productiveness of certain more lengthy or roundabout processes of production that makes producers willing to undertake them.

322
00:34:48.040 --> 00:34:53.900
The causation is the reverse of what Boehm-Bawerk sometimes implied.

323
00:34:53.900 --> 00:34:59.800
But if the length or roundaboutness of various periods of production is to be thrown out

324
00:34:59.800 --> 00:35:06.520
as irrelevant to a discussion of saving and investment, or capital and interest, then

325
00:35:06.520 --> 00:35:13.960
consistency would force us also to throw out all considerations of relative costs of production

326
00:35:13.960 --> 00:35:18.480
in a discussion of prices of consumer or capital goods.

327
00:35:18.480 --> 00:35:24.080
For Boehm-Bawerk's analysis of the length or roundaboutness of production periods is

328
00:35:24.080 --> 00:35:30.720
only a special case of relative cost of production analysis in connection with the valuation

329
00:35:30.720 --> 00:35:36.840
or pricing process, with particular emphasis on the cost of time.

330
00:35:36.840 --> 00:35:43.920
Now both Marshall and Keynes, far from ignoring or rejecting consideration of costs of production,

331
00:35:43.920 --> 00:35:48.720
Constantly emphasize them in their discussion of prices.

332
00:35:48.720 --> 00:35:54.880
And Keynes, especially, constantly falls into the very cause-and-effect reversal error in

333
00:35:54.880 --> 00:36:01.200
connection with production costs and prices of which he accuses Boehm-Bawerk in connection

334
00:36:01.200 --> 00:36:06.800
with roundabout processes and productivity.

335
00:36:06.800 --> 00:36:10.400
ABUNDANCE UNLIMITED

336
00:36:10.400 --> 00:36:17.860
chapters 3 and 4 of chapter 16 are so fantastic in their assumptions and reasoning that it

337
00:36:17.860 --> 00:36:23.480
is difficult to know where to start picking up the fallacies and misstatements.

338
00:36:23.480 --> 00:36:29.340
Keynes begins with the bland statement, we have seen that capital has to be kept scarce

339
00:36:29.340 --> 00:36:35.220
enough in the long period to have a marginal efficiency which is at least equal to the

340
00:36:35.220 --> 00:36:37.760
rate of interest, etc.

341
00:36:37.760 --> 00:36:42.960
Page 217 This is much as if he had written, We have

342
00:36:42.960 --> 00:36:48.560
seen that commodities have to be kept scarce enough to give them a price.

343
00:36:48.560 --> 00:36:54.440
This statement embodies the insinuation both that the rate of interest is a purely artificial

344
00:36:54.440 --> 00:37:01.280
and unnecessary thing, and that capitalists have to conspire to keep everything scarce

345
00:37:01.280 --> 00:37:05.180
so that somebody or other can make a profit.

346
00:37:05.180 --> 00:37:11.540
Hans then goes on to speculate upon what would happen in a society which finds itself so

347
00:37:11.540 --> 00:37:17.340
well equipped with capital that its marginal efficiency is zero and would be negative with

348
00:37:17.340 --> 00:37:19.660
any additional investment.

349
00:37:19.660 --> 00:37:22.020
Page 217.

350
00:37:22.020 --> 00:37:29.020
And this is not merely a hypothetical assumption for the purpose of deducing hypothetical consequences,

351
00:37:29.020 --> 00:37:34.340
nor even an assumption which is not supposed to be realized for an indefinitely remote

352
00:37:34.340 --> 00:37:35.340
Future.

353
00:37:35.340 --> 00:37:42.540
If State action enters in to provide that the growth of capital equipment shall be such

354
00:37:42.540 --> 00:37:49.060
as to approach saturation point at a rate which does not put a disproportionate burden

355
00:37:49.060 --> 00:37:55.860
on the standard of life of the present generation, I should guess that a properly run community

356
00:37:55.860 --> 00:38:02.660
equipped with modern technical resources of which the population is not increasing rapidly

357
00:38:02.660 --> 00:38:08.780
ought to be able to bring down the marginal efficiency of capital in equilibrium approximately

358
00:38:08.780 --> 00:38:18.000
to zero within a single generation, page 220, and going further, if I am right in supposing

359
00:38:18.000 --> 00:38:23.920
it to be comparatively easy to make capital goods so abundant that the marginal efficiency

360
00:38:23.920 --> 00:38:30.960
of capital is zero, this may be the most sensible way of gradually getting rid of many of the

361
00:38:30.960 --> 00:38:40.080
Objectionable Features of Capitalism, page 221 Nonsense could hardly be carried further.

362
00:38:40.080 --> 00:38:46.360
The central problem with which economics deals, the problem with which mankind has been struggling

363
00:38:46.360 --> 00:38:52.600
since the beginning of time, is the problem of scarcity, and this problem is assumed away

364
00:38:52.600 --> 00:38:55.080
in a few blithe words.

365
00:38:55.080 --> 00:39:02.440
It is comparatively easy to make capital goods so abundant that the marginal efficiency of

366
00:39:02.440 --> 00:39:05.160
capital is zero.

367
00:39:05.160 --> 00:39:09.520
Did Keynes stop to think for a moment what this would imply?

368
00:39:09.520 --> 00:39:16.200
It would imply that capital goods were so abundant that they had no exchange value,

369
00:39:16.200 --> 00:39:22.400
and if they had no value, they would be as free as air, or most, water or other goods

370
00:39:22.400 --> 00:39:24.320
without scarcity.

371
00:39:24.320 --> 00:39:31.200
It would be worth nobody's while to keep such capital goods in repair, unless it cost nothing,

372
00:39:31.200 --> 00:39:34.960
not even anybody's labor, to keep them in repair.

373
00:39:34.960 --> 00:39:41.160
There would be no problem even of replacement, for as soon as there were a problem of replacement,

374
00:39:41.160 --> 00:39:47.040
it would mean that capital goods once more had a value and cost something to produce.

375
00:39:47.040 --> 00:39:52.480
Therefore, presumably, capital goods would cost nothing to produce.

376
00:39:52.480 --> 00:40:03.480
Moreover, if the marginal efficiency of capital were zero, it would also mean that no consumer goods would have any scarcity, price or exchange value.

377
00:40:03.480 --> 00:40:11.480
For as long as any consumer goods anywhere failed to reach the point of satiation and had a price or a value,

378
00:40:11.480 --> 00:40:18.480
then capital to help produce these consumer goods would have some marginal yield above zero.

379
00:40:18.480 --> 00:40:34.480
A marginal efficiency of zero for capital would mean, in brief, such an abundance of everything that neither capital goods nor consumer goods would have any scarcity, any price, or any exchange value.

380
00:40:34.480 --> 00:40:46.480
In such circumstances, the rate of interest, of course, would also fall to zero, not only because the rate of interest and the marginal yield of capital tend toward equality,

381
00:40:46.480 --> 00:40:55.480
but because it is one of the implications of a zero marginal yield for capital that no one would want to borrow money for investment.

382
00:40:55.480 --> 00:41:02.160
If someone did want to borrow money for investment enough to pay anything for the privilege,

383
00:41:02.160 --> 00:41:09.640
it would imply that to this borrower at least capital did have a marginal yield above zero.

384
00:41:09.640 --> 00:41:15.520
Capital will continue to have a marginal yield above zero in brief as long as it continues

385
00:41:15.520 --> 00:41:21.240
to help in the production of consumer goods that have a price above zero, and if these

386
00:41:21.240 --> 00:41:24.500
These consumer goods have a price above zero.

387
00:41:24.500 --> 00:41:31.040
It will be not only because they fill human wants, but because their supply is not unlimited

388
00:41:31.040 --> 00:41:34.600
and because they cost something to produce.

389
00:41:34.600 --> 00:41:40.360
And it is this cost of production and not some wicked conspiracy of the capitalists

390
00:41:40.360 --> 00:41:42.920
that keeps them scarce.

391
00:41:42.920 --> 00:41:49.720
The capital system, in fact, which is the system of free, private, competitive enterprise,

392
00:41:49.720 --> 00:41:57.120
has been doing more to reduce production costs and to relieve scarcity than any system in history.

393
00:41:57.120 --> 00:42:04.040
It is because America has come nearer to adopting a full, free, private enterprise system that

394
00:42:04.040 --> 00:42:09.640
it has done more to relieve scarcity than any other nation in history.

395
00:42:09.640 --> 00:42:15.760
But as human wants are insatiable, and as both consumer and capital goods will always,

396
00:42:15.760 --> 00:42:21.700
to repeat, cost something to produce, the day when capital will cease to have any yield

397
00:42:21.700 --> 00:42:29.180
at all and when consumer goods cease to have a price and when no scarcity of any kind exists

398
00:42:29.180 --> 00:42:32.600
is still far, far off.

399
00:42:32.600 --> 00:42:39.640
All talk of making capital so plentiful as to reduce its marginal efficiency to zero within

400
00:42:39.640 --> 00:42:44.120
a single generation is the purest moonshine.

401
00:42:44.120 --> 00:42:49.900
No doubt Keynes's system owes part of its popularity to the impression that he has at

402
00:42:49.900 --> 00:42:55.780
least provided not only that economics of abundance, of which the utopians have been

403
00:42:55.780 --> 00:43:03.020
dreaming from time immemorial, but has combined with it a conspiracy theory according to which

404
00:43:03.020 --> 00:43:09.780
the money lenders keep everything scarce in order that they may continue to receive interest.

405
00:43:09.780 --> 00:43:16.020
But if everybody could have complete abundance of everything simply by ceasing to keep capital

406
00:43:16.020 --> 00:43:23.580
scarce, then this conspiracy must certainly be the most stupid and pointless in history.

407
00:43:23.580 --> 00:43:27.900
Did Keynes seriously believe all this?

408
00:43:27.900 --> 00:43:34.220
Having announced this triumphant fallacy, Keynes proceeds to draw some triumphant corollaries

409
00:43:34.220 --> 00:43:36.060
from it.

410
00:43:36.060 --> 00:43:42.880
The post-war experiences of Great Britain and the United States are indeed actual examples

411
00:43:42.880 --> 00:43:49.100
of how an accumulation of wealth so large that its marginal efficiency has fallen more

412
00:43:49.100 --> 00:43:54.220
rapidly than the rate of interest can fall in the face of the prevailing institutional

413
00:43:54.220 --> 00:44:01.220
and psychological factors can interfere in conditions mainly of laissez-faire with a reasonable

414
00:44:01.220 --> 00:44:06.580
with a level of employment and with the standard of life which the technical conditions of

415
00:44:06.580 --> 00:44:09.540
production are capable of furnishing.

416
00:44:09.540 --> 00:44:12.100
Page 219

417
00:44:12.100 --> 00:44:15.820
This little passage contains four major fallacies.

418
00:44:15.820 --> 00:44:17.140
1.

419
00:44:17.140 --> 00:44:22.740
It is based not on a cyclical theory of depression, but on a secular theory.

420
00:44:22.740 --> 00:44:28.660
It contains the seeds of the stagnationist theory of a mature economy which the Keynesian

421
00:44:28.660 --> 00:44:36.100
and Disciples in the United States, notably Alvin H. Hansen, did so much to develop.

422
00:44:36.100 --> 00:44:43.140
This theory has been so thoroughly disposed of by George de Borg in his The Bogey of Economic

423
00:44:43.140 --> 00:44:50.940
Maturity, Chicago, Machinery and Allied Products Institute, 1945, that I shall not deal with

424
00:44:50.940 --> 00:44:52.380
it here.

425
00:44:52.380 --> 00:44:58.420
It rests on the assumption that a nation goes into an economic tailspin because it becomes

426
00:44:58.420 --> 00:45:01.460
becomes too rich for its own good.

427
00:45:01.460 --> 00:45:07.580
The tremendous growth of the American economy and even of the British economy, since Keynes's

428
00:45:07.580 --> 00:45:12.780
paragraph was written, is a sufficient refutation in itself.

429
00:45:12.780 --> 00:45:14.220
2.

430
00:45:14.220 --> 00:45:20.140
It assumes that the interest rate is not only a merely monetary phenomenon, but a purely

431
00:45:20.140 --> 00:45:22.060
arbitrary one.

432
00:45:22.060 --> 00:45:26.540
Both of these fallacies have already been sufficiently discussed.

433
00:45:26.540 --> 00:45:28.060
3.

434
00:45:28.060 --> 00:45:34.160
It shares with the technocrats and similar crank groups the naïve belief that production

435
00:45:34.160 --> 00:45:40.540
is being held down to existing levels, not by limited capital and labor, but by some

436
00:45:40.540 --> 00:45:44.900
sort of conspiracy or perversity in the system.

437
00:45:44.900 --> 00:45:46.140
4.

438
00:45:46.140 --> 00:45:53.160
It reveals Keynes's bias against economic freedom and in favor of statist controls.

439
00:45:53.160 --> 00:45:59.000
As we shall see later, his whole theory is based on the tacit assumption that neither

440
00:45:59.000 --> 00:46:06.680
businessmen, bankers, speculators, investors, nor consumers can be expected to act rationally

441
00:46:06.680 --> 00:46:12.940
in their own self-interest, but that government bureaucrats can always be depended upon to

442
00:46:12.940 --> 00:46:19.120
act with great rationality and disinterested regard for the public good.

443
00:46:19.120 --> 00:46:25.600
On the same page, in fact, from which the foregoing quotation is taken, Keynes expresses

444
00:46:25.600 --> 00:46:32.760
the fear that nations will suffer the fate of Midas if the propensity to consume and

445
00:46:32.760 --> 00:46:38.200
the rate of investment are not deliberately controlled in the social interest but are

446
00:46:38.200 --> 00:46:42.160
mainly left to the influences of laissez-faire.

447
00:46:42.160 --> 00:46:50.800
Page 219 Keynes's hostility to the rich and to the capitalist system breaks out in sarcasm's

448
00:46:50.800 --> 00:46:54.040
reminiscent of Marx.

449
00:46:54.040 --> 00:47:00.120
In so far as millionaires find their satisfaction in building mighty mansions to contain their

450
00:47:00.120 --> 00:47:06.840
bodies when alive, and pyramids to shelter them after death, or repenting of their sins,

451
00:47:06.840 --> 00:47:13.040
Erect cathedrals and endow monasteries or foreign missions, the day when abundance of

452
00:47:13.040 --> 00:47:18.480
capital will interfere with abundance of output may be postponed.

453
00:47:18.480 --> 00:47:20.640
Page 220.

454
00:47:20.640 --> 00:47:26.480
Such sentences throw considerably more light on Keynes's emotional attitudes than they

455
00:47:26.480 --> 00:47:30.320
do on the process of economic production.

456
00:47:30.320 --> 00:47:36.680
One is moved to wonder, in fact, whether the popularity of the general theory among government

457
00:47:36.680 --> 00:47:43.880
bureaucrats and in many academic groves doesn't rest precisely on its anti-business bias.