Mr. Zhang is honest. He said he couldn't read the general theory. In addition, he also confirmed that some famous economists, including his teachers and friends, could not understand the General Theory. On this point alone, I must pay tribute to Mr. Zhang. Frankly speaking, on this point, Mr. Zhang is still an economist.
This summer vacation, my daughter gave me a copy of Robert? A biography of Keynes signed by Mr. Skidelski. Robert? Skidelski studied Keynes all his life and wrote a famous biography of Keynes. To my surprise, Robert? Mr. Skidelski thought that he didn't really understand the general theory. Of course, my daughter (studying economics at Cambridge) admits that neither she nor her teacher can understand the General Theory. Although they are big fans of Keynes.
It is beneficial to admit that you don't understand. This is much better than pretending not to know. Because any economic policy is a double-edged sword. Only knowing its benefits, not knowing its harm, may lead to great disaster. In this sense, I agree with Mr. Zhang's criticism of the contemporary Keynesian school.
I admire Mr. Keynes very much. I have read the general theory several times, and I am deeply impressed by Kiehl's wisdom. Keynes is dialectical. He is good at finding the main contradiction among the complicated contradictions. Moreover, he is indeed a bold artist. He dares to break the old balance and build a new one. He redesigned the role of the government in macroeconomic management. Keynes opened up a new field of macroeconomics with his unique height and courage. I told my daughter that Keynes was not only proficient in mathematics, but also an economist. He is an excellent philosopher and historian. If we don't enter the general theory from the perspective of philosophy and economic history, it is difficult to get a glimpse of it.
The whole world (including Mr. Zhang Wuchang) thinks that Keynes's theory and Friedman's theory are opposite. In fact, the theories of the two wise men are highly unified. They are in the same equilibrium system, and each has its own emphasis. People pay too much attention to their different emphases and forget the characteristics of their identity. You know why, but you don't know why. Break away from the concept and stick to one end. This is also the reason why China's economics has far-reaching abuses.
Go back to Keynes's time. On the premise that the market economy system is relatively perfect, the increase of government expenditure by small governments will have a multiplier effect, which can effectively stimulate economic growth. Back to the reality of China. Under the premise that the market economy system is very imperfect, will the big government increase government expenditure crazily, thus producing multiplier effect? According to China people's own definition: stimulate the economy! This is humiliating Keynesian theory.
Back to Friedman's time. Under the premise that government behavior is strictly bound by law, the balanced development of the economic system can be maintained through market regulation (monetary policy), thus effectively ironing out the cyclical fluctuations of the economic crisis and realizing long-term stable economic growth. Back to the reality of China. On the premise that government behavior is completely unconstrained, the spontaneous regulation function of the market is emphasized, and the administrative power is deeply involved in the market operation in the name of institutions, which leads to the economic crisis. Is this Lideman's theory?
At the very least, Mr Zhang Wuchang admits that he can't read the General Theory. I haven't heard of any economist in China who admitted that he couldn't read the general theory. Seeing those guys playing so-called comparative economics and development economics, I can't help but want to eat rice. So is the avenue. If you can't reach the same height, you can't have personality. Not the same height, but with personality, it must be opportunistic. Smart people miss big things. Maybe it's really hard to study honestly in China. Especially in the field of economics.
There are various types of economic research institutions in China and a large number of economic researchers in China. China is even a Keynesian country. However, can anyone in China establish a mathematical model of the negative effects of Keynesian theory? Does anyone know where the critical point of the positive effect of the government's economic stimulus policy is? Is there a clear concept of quantity and time? What does it mean to go beyond the critical point? How to accurately evaluate the negative effects of government stimulus on economy? How to avoid multiplier effect becoming divisor effect? The government only knows its advantages but not its disadvantages, so it is inevitable that a crisis will brew in it if it acts rashly.
Mr Zhang Wuchang has the acumen of an economist. He has realized that the current economic policy will lead to some things. I even agree with his premonition of disaster. Unfortunately, he put this account on Keynes. I understand Lidman's disciples very well. However, they may not understand Lidman. They are still spinning around in formal logic.
Bodhi has no trees. However, countless pedestrians insisted on hanging themselves from a nonexistent tree.