COMMENT: You are correct. I went to the London …. and they said there was a business cycle but it was random and but it could not be defined.
REPLY: Yes. Somehow, everything inverted after Keynes. Neither Marx nor Keynes denied the existence of a business cycle. Both sought to manipulate it, but they did not deny its existence. This evolution to a state of denial has taken place post-Keynes. Paul Volcker explained it best in 1978 within his “Rediscovery of the Business Cycle”:
The Rediscovery of the Business Cycle – is a sign of the times. Not much more than a decade ago, in what now seems a more innocent age, the ‘New Economics’ had become orthodoxy. Its basic tenet, repeated in similar words in speech after speech, in article after article, was described by one of its leaders as ‘the conviction that business cycles were not inevitable, that government policy could and should keep the economy close to a path of steady real growth at a constant target rate of unemployment.
The economists who are in a state of denial are extremely dangerous people. Like Rogoff of Harvard, they assume we are sheep and that economists and government possess both the right and the mental and physical capacity to manipulate the people. I disagree with that entirely. So, I say stop criticizing and PROVE that the business cycle does not exist and that government has been capable of preventing a recession even one time.
I for one would love to split the country in two; all those people who want to control others should go to the left side and leave the rest of us alone on the right side of the divide. The problem is that they always want to rob what other people have to make their world better for them. They are not satisfied with their own productivity; they covet what everyone else has without having to work as hard for it. The bottom line: we should have less human rights to be free for we possess something they want.