Katie C. wrote:
3: Yugoslavia was a developed, industrialized nation. And no, 7% is not a given in an industrializing nation. Very few nations in the world have growth 7% or higher. Yugoslavia did meet its tenets adequately in the long run, what screwed it up was getting bullied by the IMF and CIA, then caving to their demands, turning into the Greece of their time by privatizing everything and taking bad loans. The crash wasn’t from a failure at communism, it was because of foreign economic pressure followed with a full ideological shift.
7: Slow revolution can also screw up, it’s just less apparent because it’s not seen as revolution. Everyone remembers it if things go wrong fast, people remember if things go right fast, or if they go right slow, but people don’t seem to be attentive of when it happens slowly.
8: For Keynes, see this. http://www.libertyjuice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/unemployment-new-deal.jpg
Here’s a few notes: FDR managed to keep those parts of the New Deal constitutional by having it reinterpreted after having the amount of Supreme Court justices risen from 5 to 9.
Also, the Second New Deal started in ’35, not ’37 as the table claims.
Spending cuts occurred in ’37, and an economic stimulus came in ’38. Funny, the graph seems to drop as you spend money.
Now, for Smith, that’s not what an Invisible Hand means, it’s actually about morality in one book of his, and I’ll get to the other later. “The proud and unfeeling landlord views his extensive fields, and without a thought for the wants of his brethren, in imagination consumes himself the whole harvest … [Yet] the capacity of his stomach bears no proportion to the immensity of his desires … the rest he will be obliged to distribute among those, who prepare, in the nicest manner, that little which he himself makes use of, among those who fit up the palace in which this little is to be consumed, among those who provide and keep in order all the different baubles and trinkets which are employed in the economy of greatness; all of whom thus derive from his luxury and caprice, that share of the necessaries of life, which they would in vain have expected from his humanity or his justice…The rich…are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life, which would have been made, had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants, and thus without intending it, without knowing it, advance the interest of the society…” An Invisible Hand does appear in The Wealth of Nations, but it still has nothing to do with regulation. “By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was not part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.”
By the way, Adam Smith was actually pro regulation, especially when banks were involved.