Keynesian Multiplier: Conspiracy Or Zeitgeist?

In discussing how these conspiracies get to be so big, with no-one being caught, I reasoned it was really to do with the zeitgeist of a subgroup. We have been lied to about this matter of a Keynesian multiplier for almost three quarters of a century now. Economists are willing to lie all the time about this matter. Unlike stupidity in physics, for example, there is not the maths handicap to befuddle people on the Keynesian multiplier. The maths used here is pretty simple algebra. The lie of the Keynesian multiplier continues despite three devastating realities.

1. the fact that there has never been any empirical evidence brought forth in its favour. None whatsoever. Anyone claiming otherwise is a liar. And a moron also. Because even the most shallow investigation of just what GDP is (C+(net)I+G+X-M) reveals that GDP is not all of spending. Or even all of spending that represents productive activity. Actually GDP specifically excludes most of productive expenditure. We have net investment. Where is the rest of Gross Investment? So the idea that this metric can be used to prove the existence of a Keynesian multiplier is obviously mentally retarded, big green bogie in the nose, drooling idiocy, stuff. When advocates pretend they have evidence for the Keynesian multiplier, in all instances they are lying since they are trying to make that case using GDP as the metric.

2. The fact that the very idea of a Keynesian multiplier is irrational. Since it tells us that the transfer of spending is somehow sanctified by either government stealing or borrowing. And that this money is somehow tagged by some sort of mystical transmutation. And that this money so tagged, then gains special powers. Obviously this is an irrational proposition.

3. The Keynesian multiplier, even if it worked, would be utterly useless. To know that it worked, if it did, would give us no guidance whatsoever. Since extra spending is inflationary, and since we can hit any spending level we want by the combination of new money creation and increasing the reserve asset ratio. Deficit spending re-routes spending. It doesn’t create new spending. But if it were to create extra spending, it would be an wholly redundant ability. Since the fastest, most accurate, least damaging, and in fact the ONLY WAY to hit any spending target we want to hit, is to be achieved by combining debt retirement, through new cash creation ….. and adjusting upward the reserve asset ratio.

So why does anyone doubt the ability of the Victorian Police/Judicial/Corrections/Societal system to produce conspiracies to murder prisoners and drug dealers? Its just the zeitgeist really. Supposing you were to say…. “No the Victorians aren’t capable of conspiring in this way” well you would be lying.

Well how about global warming? Its a proven fraud for many reasons, but one of them is that if CO2 worked as advertised, and reduced the rate of cooling towards the next glacial period, on the basis that it reduced heat differentials, well obviously that would be a terrific thing. End of story. So its fraudulent from the start. Everyone knows that they are liars by now. Anyone claiming otherwise is himself a liar or has only just started looking into matters seriously. Sure its a conspiracy. Why doubt it? But its really also the culture. The culture having been desensitized to leftist whining so persistently that little compromises get made with these people. Compromises on the use of language. Meeting them halfway on a range of points of discussion that mean that the threads go on forever and can never be resolved.

Or how about the idea that American spooktown isn’t capable of assassinating someone and then blaming this on a patsy? Anyone who makes this claim is also lying. So sure its a conspiracy. This is what the CIA does. This is their line of business, or at least it used to be back in the sixties. The denial and knee-jerk running down of conspiracies is part of the conspiracy itself. The tiredness and embarrassment that people experience when new evidence comes up about an old suspicious death; this too is an essential part of the zeitgeist that makes these conspiracies possible, and that fuels the demand for new conspiracies just like the ones that were being denied.

Sinclair Davidson before the Senate conspired to imply to the Senators that there really was such a thing as a Keynesian multiplier. Next thing we were having to put up with this fucking stimulus package that has done enourmous damage. Is it a conspiracy? You fucking bet it is. But its not possible to separate conspiracy from zeitgeist. Its all part of one holistic dysfunction.