that was the mainstream keynes before -- mainstream before keynes.cated to the sidelines. like any group, he developed a loyal following. apple is mainstream now but was not always. a good slogan goes a long way for people who feel like they are not getting heard. >> when i got into preparing for this show, i started to drown in all the different website and blog. we talked earlier about "cafe hayek" what is that? >> that is my blog about the issues of the day. >> what level? >> graduates. this semester i'm teaching a seminar on adam smith. >> did they have to watch your videos? >> they are all fans. they told me about it. they like it appeared >> john papola is -- "econtalk" is what? >> it is my podcast. in his everyday people, business leaders. quite how many of them are they? >> they are very interested in education. there are about 250. >> are there one or two that have really taken off? >> i interviewed milton friedman twice. those were popular appear. he has been on this 19 times. [unintelligible] he is a frequent guest on my podcast. we cast h

it might be the last time we see keynes and hayek on the screen.probably. i hope we will collaborate on something different. >> [unintelligible] >> i think that we have managed to cover a lot of ground with these two. the best thing we can do for them and for these videos is to give them a chance to be covered and jokes for the ideas that serve around them. there is a lot of stuff in these two videos. there are other issues to cover. i will not count out the possibility every turn. but sometimes it is good to go away from them. when you come back, at you are that much more excited to see them return. >> john papola, russ roberts. you can find these video youtube.com thank you very much for joining us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> for a dvd copy of this program, call 1-877-662-7726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us atq-and-a.org. >> next, british prime minister david cameron and the house of commons. after that, an inte

>> massive cuts in taxes which brought more revenue in. >> keynes was in favor of taxing. never made a particular distinction between government spending or taxes. his point was you need demand in the economy. stimulate demand. >> no, no, no ronald reagan wouldn't hold war, not part of his taking a keynesian approach to the economy. thank you. >> tax cuts are a keynesian approach. >> your statement would be nice if it were true but it's not. the reality is if you look at the economics and what the impact is of cutting the margin rates, government spending, the incentives to job creation, keynes has been right in terms of understanding, if you sat down and were a business person, making capital aroelections decisions, hiring, you look at the return. right now there's a demand crisis of enormous volume. that's why we need to create demand in the economy to generate things we can buy. >> obama has been following your policy and that's why we have a crisis. >> executives are sitting on $2 trillion of capital. the key to getting that capital back into the economy to hire people

again, just so it's clear before ann starts jumping up and down, i actually believe keynes was right,keynesian economic works and it's also true of the constitution, something the tea party may not agree with. and i think the president needs to defend not just in the context of the auto bailout where it's easier to point to gm and chrysler and say look what we accomplished, but the entire economy would have been so much worse, that the implosion of both confidence, a financial system, job creation would have been devastating had we not put in place that cushion of the stimulus package. now, you're saying it would have been worse but for, and that's not an appeal in a political argument. and i think the president now at this moment of intense weakness, lack of job creation needs to bring all of this oratorical and intellectual skills to bear to say here's what the record shows us. david cameron, may be a great leader, the british economy is not faring well because of those cuts. there is a sense of reality -- >> if britain we're trying to deal with this deficit. >> maybe you're doing t

keynesian thinking but it wasn't it was keynes was saying that you can go into debt during the slow times but during the good times you try to pay down that debt well it's actually kinds kind of talking about public debt is really what's happening with private ok what you get in reverse is that when you when you look at a financial system we're in it's a system driven by privately created it and this which was therefore creates credit money. you also have a government system which can create government debt and in the process creates fit money so those two sources of money flowing into the economy neoclassical economists the guys that i pillory in the banking economics mistakenly believe that the government system controls the private bit like a having you know a centrally controlled system making sure that all the cars move at the right speed on a freeway in fact what you've got it got a whole bunch out of control cars being driven by out in the center on too many dozens of stimulants and the government's coming along in ambulance chasing the wreckage so private created credit draw

well you know i really was thinking more about when keynes. keynes versus friedman basically that's where i'm going because this stuff kind of started around the seventy's and it was actually a unique moment in history where keynesian economics looked like it wasn't explaining what was going on the both very high unemployment and very high inflation that was kind of hard to fit into the basic keynesian model and at the same time you had this historical moment where. milton. predictions about the economy going we're actually very accurate and actually quite smart at least a monitor aside so that and that actually interacted with the beginning of a wealth concentration in a president named ronald reagan who came on the scene and explained how if we just deregulate and cut your taxes that's all going to work out well and you know forgetting your spinach it's all desert everything will be fine and trickle down and yada yada and you know here's where we are yeah and we've been we've been we've been fools. in this new economy that we have such obs a

against transnational corporations that use weight to maximize profits that includes a company like keynes that made over a billion dollars last year wal-mart that made more than fourteen billion dollars last year thanks in large part to buying cheap products from factories like that classic factory in jordan that uses rape to keep its employees in line. free trade has created a race to the bottom around the world for the most intimate and labor force is the least protected conditions in factories across america had dramatically improved in the hundred years of the triangle shirtwaist factory one of the planes we shouldn't sleep any easier at night just because employee abuse is out of sight and out of mind and exists all around the world in places like jordan and bangladesh or corporate power has overtaken sovereign governments and the power of the protections offered average workers as long as so-called american corporations like walmart are dealing in abusive labor practices around the world and so too is america and the only way to put an end to that of us is for us to put an end to th

in 1831, keynes and his followers elaborated the night, although they still can't theories into former equations in order to make an acceptable to the economics profession. but the years of economics by contrast sought to eliminate the uncertainty connected with activity from their subject matter. hayek was one of them. .. just as easily but if they are out how actively ignore that activity. they found another basis for a eliminating which was more influential. that's the way that i was taught at the receipt. rather than define the subject matter of economics as the allocation of limited resources among alternative uses. we argued that studying the conditions of the supply and demand themselves was outside the scope of economics and therefore supply and demand growth should be taken as independent. the intersection then determines the price. by this methodological subterfuge rather in the lead to managed to eliminate the facts that the mass uprising of the financial assets can have on both the demand and supply curve. in other words, it could eliminate. the debate in the economic took

this debt load keeping this in mind now of course one of the big pushers of the debt let's say is keynes keynesian thinking but wasn't it when it came to the thing that you can go into debt during this low times but during the good times you try to pay down that debt but it's actually kind of kind of talking about public that because it really was having with a private bank and what you get in reverse is that when you when you look at the financial system we're in it's a system driven by privately created it and it's also which was before creates credit money but you also have a government system which can create government debt and in the process creates the it money so there's two sources of money flowing into the economy and in a classical economist the gauze of a pillory in the banking economics mistakenly believe that the government system controls the private bit like a having you know a centrally controlled system making sure that all the causative at the right speed on a freeway in fact what you've got is rather more like a whole bunch out of control cars being driven by out in t

legislative and executive also in their spears would make the judiciary a despotic branch despotic like keynes in another letter to his old friend spencer rowan and chief justice of the virginia supreme court patrick henry's uncle your nephew thomas jefferson wrote if this decision be sound that indeed is our constitution a complete suicide pact for the constitution on this hypothesis jefferson said is a mere thing of blacks in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape in any form they please and today the roberts court has twisted and shaped our waxy constitution into a corporate charter for rich c.e.o.'s to run amok in our electoral politics had jefferson known in one thousand nine hundred three just how far the supreme court would go and enshrining corporate power in america he likely would have led a revolt against the corded himself. but in fact for the next thirty years or actually a little more than thirty years the john marshall or the chief justice of the court never again struck down the law so the issue of the court having too much power was that stain and now it's h

keynes, here i come. lined up for the procession. don't you think it's time for a switch from the hair of the dog? >> this weekend, we will talk with the creators of "fight of the century," an economics professor and a comic. >> we are reaching people interested in how the world works, everything from a high- school student curious about economics to a person just trying to make a living who is worried about what is going on in washington. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on "q&a." >> next, law professors and review the major supreme court decisions of the october term, at the fourth circuit annual judicial conference. panels examine how the justices ruled on specific court cases. they discuss freedom of speech and the first amendment, federalism, and campaign finance laws. this is just over the two hours. >> good morning once again to everybody. i am happy to welcome all of you to the supreme court review for the fourth circuit. our plan is one that if you have been here before you are familiar with. we propose during the