SOCIALISTS HAVE A GREAT UNHEALTHY HABIT OF ATTEMPTS AT REWRITING HISTORY, TO SUIT THEIR PROPAGANDA OBJECTIVES. THE TRUTH CAN NEVER BE SURPRESSED FOR TOO LONG. FACTS HAVE LIFE AND ALWAYS DISPROVES HALF TRUTHS AND OUTRIGHT LIES ... read full comment
SOCIALISTS HAVE A GREAT UNHEALTHY HABIT OF ATTEMPTS AT REWRITING HISTORY, TO SUIT THEIR PROPAGANDA OBJECTIVES. THE TRUTH CAN NEVER BE SURPRESSED FOR TOO LONG. FACTS HAVE LIFE AND ALWAYS DISPROVES HALF TRUTHS AND OUTRIGHT LIES. KWARTENG TRIES HARD TO PAINT A ROSY PICTURE OF HIS BELOVED, BUT FAILED IDEOLOGY, YET HE GETS VANQUISHED BY FACT AND NOTHING BUT FACT.
Kojo T 8 years ago
I am not sure you understand the fundementals 1 Keynes idea of state is different rom Marxism. Marxism dwells on state ownership that should result in communism.Keynes theory is dealing with cycles and what the state can do t ... read full comment
I am not sure you understand the fundementals 1 Keynes idea of state is different rom Marxism. Marxism dwells on state ownership that should result in communism.Keynes theory is dealing with cycles and what the state can do to alleviate .Prosperity is based on demand of goods and services and if there is of demand we have a depression.Instead of sacking more labor the State comes in to create demand .2 There is something called the MULTIPLIER Efect.That is what was used by the USA and the Marshall Plan and is involved in Nkrumaism .An investment creates a chain of other investments 3 I am sorry you think I insulted you the last time but then thinkof this 4 How do you create capitalism with people who have no capital nor skills.Keynes theory and Nkrumaism then use the statet oome in Take a look at Workers Brigade, SCC, GNTC .We African imbibe theories and over look the practical applications.Keynes and his theories are not dead Reaganomics is a variant and the current USA success is proof it is alive and well.But then everything EVOLVESV
JATO KWASHIVI RAWLINGS. 8 years ago
IF SO MOVE TO LIVE IN VLADIMIR PUTIN'S RUSSIA, CUBA AND DO ONE BETTER, GO TO CHINA OR NORTH KOREA. DO GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND SILICON VALLEY BELONG TO UNCLE SAM????? FREE ENTERPRISE AND MARKET ECONOMICS IS TH ... read full comment
IF SO MOVE TO LIVE IN VLADIMIR PUTIN'S RUSSIA, CUBA AND DO ONE BETTER, GO TO CHINA OR NORTH KOREA. DO GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND SILICON VALLEY BELONG TO UNCLE SAM????? FREE ENTERPRISE AND MARKET ECONOMICS IS THE FOUNDATION AND BEDROCK OF DEVELOPMENT. WHERE HAS ALL THE STATE ENTERPRISES IN GHANA TAKEN THE NATION, WHICH ALWAYS BEGS FOR IMF BAILOUT, BECAUSE STATE INVOLVEMENT IN ENTERPRISE BREEDS GROSS, DAMAGING CORRUPTION(A LA CHINA, RUSSIA, GHANA ETC.) ESPECIALLY UNDER A PSEUDO SOCIALIST NDC PARTY.
Philip Kobina Baidoo 8 years ago
The only important thing you have said here is the multiplier effect, and that can also be created in the private sector. You don't need the government to do that, which eventually leads to corruption. You live in the United ... read full comment
The only important thing you have said here is the multiplier effect, and that can also be created in the private sector. You don't need the government to do that, which eventually leads to corruption. You live in the United State you will be surprised to find out the way government largesse were distributed under FDR. Thank you
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Kojo T,
Don't mind them.
These shameless guys don't know what they are talking about.
They have been misrepresenting and distorting the facts almost on everything from the American meltdown, subprime and the forecl ... read full comment
Kojo T,
Don't mind them.
These shameless guys don't know what they are talking about.
They have been misrepresenting and distorting the facts almost on everything from the American meltdown, subprime and the foreclosure crisis, capitalism, Nordic Model, Beijing Consensus, Washington consensus, communism, climate change, and what have you.
These shameless liars have not even seen yet or entered the zone of technicalities (the mathematics, logic, science, and physics of economic. YES THE PHYSICS OF ECONOMICS) and here they are already fumbling on the basics or simplest of ideas.
As for their kind of capitalism and communism the less said about them, the better.
Their kind of capitalism and communism have never existed anywhere. They have existed only on paper. That is why they refuse to define the two concepts when you ask them to do so.
Far from that, they have no clue what Keynes stood for or what Keynesian economics mean.
Yet I read their comments and realize that they are lost as Baidoo in on 100% of the issues. They all throw concepts about as though they have no meaning.
Kojo T, even the little you said to them here on this forum is beyond them. Maybe next time I will explore with them the implications in terms of the advanced mathematics of what you contributions mean.
They will rather avoid the technical and sophisticated implications of your comments than wallow in trivialities. Sarpong Jato Kwashivi Rawlings is using "twaddle" here as if he even understands Baidoo's lies and fabrications. He doesn't. This is probably the shameful legacy of the bad and horrible education we have in Ghana today.
Clearly they have no idea what you are saying. They will rather "steal" ideas elsewhere and present them here as their own rather than read the primary sources themselves.
Uncritically copying someone's else's ideas invariably means that you carry his or her deficits along. That is what I see in some of these articles passing of as "genuine" or "original."
Have a great weekend Kojo T.
Thanks.
Richard 8 years ago
What is this baidoo guy trying to achieve?
What is this baidoo guy trying to achieve?
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
Dear Philip Baidoo,
I will not waste my time dismissing your fallacies and inaccuracies but I shall concentrate on only one (other readers may do the rest; I have decided to ignore but a friend impressed upon me to respond ... read full comment
Dear Philip Baidoo,
I will not waste my time dismissing your fallacies and inaccuracies but I shall concentrate on only one (other readers may do the rest; I have decided to ignore but a friend impressed upon me to respond. I see your articles but ignore them because they are not worth my intellectual resources and time): John Maynard Keynes’ “General Theory.”
The problem with you is that you always want to take a shortcut: Childish and analytic simplicity. You hate doing serious thinking and expanding your horizon on simple ideas.
Let me re-iterate that you are wrong most of the time because you are not capable of doing the simple things right (I am not saying I am better or know everything. No one does. I make mistakes but yours seems to be over the top).
I don’t think you are good at reading original texts (let’s ignore secondary and tertiary sources for now). But you are good at misreading texts, quoting texts out of context, and misrepresenting and mis-paraphrasing facts.
I have always insisted that you are not a deep think and that you love to wallow in your general ignorance. I say this not as an insult but as fact. This is why:
First, Keynes had been influencing the West (particularly Britain and America) since the 1920s and 1930s with such notable works:
1)The Economic Consequences of the War (1919)
2)Revision of the Treaty (1922)
3)The Inflation of Currency as A Method of Taxation (1922)
4)The End of Laissez-Faire (1926)
5)A Tract on Monetary Reform (1923)
6)A Treatise on Money (1930)
7)The Great Slump of 1930 (1931)
8)Essays in Persuasion (1931)
9)The Means to Prosperity (1933)
In other words, Keynes’ impressive ideas spread throughout the America, Europe and the rest of the world beginning in the early part of the 20th century. Even President Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921), the American President during the First World War, came under Keynes’ influence.
Have you read the “Economic Consequences of the War” and “Revision of the Treaty” yet? Well, let me put that aside and proceed. Most of the ideas Keynes explored in the afore-cited works (and others I have not mentioned here) made their way into “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.” Lest I forget, Keynes published “Treatise of Money” in two volumes in 1930.
For instance, (3), (5), (6), and (8) deal with money, interest rates, and inflation among others on the “Interest” and “Money in “The General Theory.” (9) deals with issues of employment/unemployment among others in the “Employment” part of “The General Theory.”
So for you to have understood the quote you attribute to me meant that, at least, you should have read the entire body of Keynes’ works prior to the publication of “The General Theory” in 1936. I am however convinced you did not do this because the shallowness of your article says it all.
To make matters worse for you never bothered to find out how long it took Keynes to write “The General Theory” or how long it took him to research for the book? I have already said Keynes had been influencing America and its leaders and policy makers since the 1920s.
Well Keynes had been working on the connections between PRICING MECHANISMS, MONEY, and UNEMPLOYMENT since the 1920s (see Steven Pressman’s book “Fifty Great Economists (2004)”).
Remember I also said Keynes worked out his theories on unemployment and other such related topics in “The Means to Prosperity”? He sent a copy of this book to President Franklin Roosevelt in 1933 (see Robert Skidelsky’s book “John Maynard Keynes: 1883-1946 (2005”)!
If you want to know how President and his Administration felt after reading this book, “The Means to Prosperity,” then read Skidelsky’s book.
Remember this was in 1933. Also remember that “The Means to Prosperity” was important to “The General Theory.” Other world leaders who read the book in 1933 were impressed by its forceful arguments.
In sum, putting everything together the central ideas of “The General Theory” were already “known” going all the way back to the 1920s in America before it was published in 1936.
I can only say at this point that Keynes brought together all those precursory ideas into one place, “The General Theory,” with analytic and theoretical rigor. Therefore you would not have made that faulty conclusion if you a student of John Maynard Keynes, history of economic thought, and global history.
You keep making the same mistakes in all your articles. Keynes even visited President Roosevelt in 1934 (Please check this date for me if I am right!).
Let me remind you of other facts:
The New Deal (1933-1938)is usually divided into two periods:
New Deal 1 (1933-1934)
New Deal 2 (1935-1938)
Let us go over these additional facts (Please check the dates for me if I am right):
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1933)
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (1933)
Tennessee and Exchange Commission (1933)
Securities and Exchange Commission (1934)
Federal Housing Administration (1934)
Social Security System (1935)
I even forgot to mention two other ideas President Roosevelt got from Keynesian economics (which I did not include in my article upon which your faulty, wrongheaded, and misinformed article is based on:
Civilian Conservation Corps (1933)
Workers Progress Administration (1935)
Now those who want to see how Keynes’ predictions about the Second World War (WW2) should read “The Economic Consequences of the Peace” and “Revision of the Treaty.”
Readers can research into how the Second World War happened and judge for themselves. Please I am not going to do this for anyone (I am sorry). This should have been Baidoo’s task.
And like I said before, I will not bother addressing the other portions of his article because it is just as misinformed and clueless as his other articles.
Now, I have given a little bit of information to guide Baidoo what sort of context he should have given to the quotation he attributes to me (there is more information but I have to end here to go and catch some sleep, for Baidoo is not a thinker or conscionable to waste one’s sleep over. I mean the information here is a tip of the iceberg).
Now readers can enjoy this letter which Keynes wrote to President Roosevelt in 1933 (before his 1934 visit to the United States to meet with President Roosevelt. Baidoo can check for me if the contents of this letter are authentic. You never know!).
WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE, KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS HAS BEEN AROUND (SINCE THE EARLY 1920s) BEFORE THE 1936 PUBLICATION OF "THE GENERAL THEORY." BAIDOO MISSED THIS SIMPLE FACT OF INTELLECTUAL HISTORY.
AND NEVER THINK BECAUSE MY SILENCE ON YOUR ARTICLES MEANS I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING.
I SEE YOUR LIES, MISREPRESENTATIONS, FACTUAL DISTORTIONS, ANALYTIC ERRORS, ETC., BUT DO NOT WANT TO WASTE MY TIME ALWAYS POINTING THEM OUT TO YOU BECAUSE I HAVE ASSURED THOSE WHO HAVE INSISTED I DO NOT PAY YOU ATTENTION I WAS NOT GOING TO FORMALLY REBUT YOUR THOUGHTLESS ARTICLES.
IN FACT THERE ARE SO MANY OF THEM (THE LIES, FACTUAL ERRORS, ETC) THAT I CAN'T KEEP COUNT OR TAB ON. SOME READERS HAVE BROUGHT A FEW TO YOUR ATTENTION. I ALWAYS WANTED OTHER READERS TO SHARE THEIR OPINIONS WITH YOUR!
Link: newdeal.feri.org/index.htm
..............................................................................................................................................................................................
An Open Letter to President Roosevelt
John Maynard Keynes
18, Norham Gardens
Oxford, England
16. xii. 33.
In response to the New York Times' request for his views on the American outlook, Keynes has written "An Open Letter to President Roosevelt," which is scheduled to appear in the Sunday issue of December 31st and is to be syndicated in other parts of the United States.
So that you may see what he has to say before it is published, Keynes this morning sent me the enclosed copy of his article, which I hasten to get off directly to you through Miss LeHand (without forwarding it through the pouch) in the hope that it may catch the Bremen, which leaves tonight.
Yesterday's Times carried illuminating extracts from Wallace's Annual Report. What a good Secretary of Agriculture you have!
With warm regards,
Faithfully yours,
[Felix Frankfurter]
Hon. Franklin D. Roosevelt
Enc
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT
By John Maynard Keynes.
Dear Mr President,
1.You have made yourself the Trustee for those in every country who seek to mend the evils of our condition by reasoned experiment within the framework of the existing social system. If you fail, rational change will be gravely prejudiced throughout the world, leaving orthodoxy and revolution to fight it out. But if you succeed, new and bolder methods will be tried everywhere, and we may date the first chapter of a new economic era from your accession to office. This is a sufficient reason why I should venture to lay my reflections before you, though under the disadvantages of distance and partial knowledge.
2.At the moment your sympathisers in England are nervous and sometimes despondent. We wonder whether the order of different urgencies is rightly understood, whether there is a confusion of aim, and whether some of the advice you get is not crack-brained and queer. If we are disconcerted when we defend you, this may be partly due to the influence of our environment in London. For almost everyone here has a wildly distorted view of what is happening in the United States. The average City man believes that you are engaged on a hare-brained expedition in face of competent advice, that the best hope lies in your ridding yourself of your present advisers to return to the old ways, and that otherwise the United States is heading for some ghastly breakdown. That is what they say they smell. There is a recrudescence of wise head-waging by those who believe that the nose is a nobler organ than the brain. London is convinced that we only have to sit back and wait, in order to see what we shall see. May I crave your attention, whilst I put my own view?
3.You are engaged on a double task, Recovery and Reform;--recovery from the slump and the passage of those business and social reforms which are long overdue. For the first, speed and quick results are essential. The second may be urgent too; but haste will be injurious, and wisdom of long-range purpose is more necessary than immediate achievement. It will be through raising high the prestige of your administration by success in short-range Recovery, that you will have the driving force to accomplish long-range Reform. On the other hand, even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action, before you have had time to put other motives in their place. It may over-task your bureaucratic machine, which the traditional individualism of the United States and the old "spoils system" have left none too strong. And it will confuse the thought and aim of yourself and your administration by giving you too much to think about all at once.
4.Now I am not clear, looking back over the last nine months, that the order of urgency between measures of Recovery and measures of Reform has been duly observed, or that the latter has not sometimes been mistaken for the former. In particular, I cannot detect any material aid to recovery in N.I.R.A., though its social gains have been large. The driving force which has been put behind the vast administrative task set by this Act has seemed to represent a wrong choice in the order of urgencies. The Act is on the Statute Book; a considerable amount has been done towards implementing it; but it might be better for the present to allow experience to accumulate before trying to force through all its details. That is my first reflection--that N.I.R.A., which is essentially Reform and probably impedes Recovery, has been put across too hastily, in the false guise of being part of the technique of Recovery.
5.My second reflection relates to the technique of Recovery itself. The object of recovery is to increase the national output and put more men to work. In the economic system of the modern world, output is primarily produced for sale; and the volume of output depends on the amount of purchasing power, compared with the prime cost of production, which is expected to come n the market. Broadly speaking, therefore, and increase of output depends on the amount of purchasing power, compared with the prime cost of production, which is expected to come on the market. Broadly speaking, therefore, an increase of output cannot occur unless by the operation of one or other of three factors. Individuals must be induced to spend more out o their existing incomes; or the business world must be induced, either by increased confidence in the prospects or by a lower rate of interest, to create additional current incomes in the hands of their employees, which is what happens when either the working or the fixed capital of the country is being increased; or public authority must be called in aid to create additional current incomes through the expenditure of borrowed or printed money. In bad times the first factor cannot be expected to work on a sufficient scale. The second factor will come in as the second wave of attack on the slump after the tide has been turned by the expenditures of public authority. It is, therefore, only from the third factor that we can expect the initial major impulse.
6.Now there are indications that two technical fallacies may have affected the policy of your administration. The first relates to the part played in recovery by rising prices. Rising prices are to be welcomed because they are usually a symptom of rising output and employment. When more purchasing power is spent, one expects rising output at rising prices. Since there cannot be rising output without rising prices, it is essential to ensure that the recovery shall not be held back by the insufficiency of the supply of money to support the increased monetary turn-over. But there is much less to be said in favour of rising prices, if they are brought about at the expense of rising output. Some debtors may be helped, but the national recovery as a whole will be retarded. Thus rising prices caused by deliberately increasing prime costs or by restricting output have a vastly inferior value to rising prices which are the natural result of an increase in the nation's purchasing power.
7.I do not mean to impugn the social justice and social expediency of the redistribution of incomes aimed at by N.I.R.A. and by the various schemes for agricultural restriction. The latter, in particular, I should strongly support in principle. But too much emphasis on the remedial value of a higher price-level as an object in itself may lead to serious misapprehension as to the part which prices can play in the technique of recovery. The stimulation of output by increasing aggregate purchasing power is the right way to get prices up; and not the other way round.
8.Thus as the prime mover in the first stage of the technique of recovery I lay overwhelming emphasis on the increase of national purchasing power resulting from governmental expenditure which is financed by Loans and not by taxing present incomes. Nothing else counts in comparison with this. In a boom inflation can be caused by allowing unlimited credit to support the excited enthusiasm of business speculators. But in a slump governmental Loan expenditure is the only sure means of securing quickly a rising output at rising prices. That is why a war has always caused intense industrial activity. In the past orthodox finance has regarded a war as the only legitimate excuse for creating employment by governmental expenditure. You, Mr President, having cast off such fetters, are free to engage in the interests of peace and prosperity the technique which hitherto has only been allowed to serve the purposes of war and destruction.
9.The set-back which American recovery experienced this autumn was the predictable consequence of the failure of your administration to organise any material increase in new Loan expenditure during your first six months of office. The position six months hence will entirely depend on whether you have been laying the foundations for larger expenditures in the near future.
10.I am not surprised that so little has been spent up-to-date. Our own experience has shown how difficult it is to improvise useful Loan-expenditures at short notice. There are many obstacle to be patiently overcome, if waste, inefficiency and corruption are to be avoided. There are many factors, which I need not stop to enumerate, which render especially difficult in the United States the rapid improvisation of a vast programme of public works. I do not blame Mr Ickes for being cautious and careful. But the risks of less speed must be weighed against those of more haste. He must get across the crevasses before it is dark.
11.The other set of fallacies, of which I fear the influence, arises out of a crude economic doctrine commonly known as the Quantity Theory of Money. Rising output and rising incomes will suffer a set-back sooner or later if the quantity of money is rigidly fixed. Some people seem to infer from this that output and income can be raised by increasing the quantity of money. But this is like trying to get fat by buying a larger belt. In the United States to-day your belt is plenty big enough for your belly. It is a most misleading thing to stress the quantity of money, which is only a limiting factor, rather than the volume of expenditure, which is the operative factor.
12.It is an even more foolish application of the same ideas to believe that there is a mathematical relation between the price of gold and the prices of other things. It is true that the value of the dollar in terms of foreign currencies will affect the prices of those goods which enter into international trade. In so far as an over-valuation of the dollar was impeding the freedom of domestic price-raising policies or disturbing the balance of payments with foreign countries, it was advisable to depreciate it. But exchange depreciation should follow the success of your domestic price-raising policy as its natural consequence, and should not be allowed to disturb the whole world by preceding its justification at an entirely arbitrary pace. This is another example of trying to put on flesh by letting out the belt.
13.These criticisms do not mean that I have weakened in my advocacy of a managed currency or in preferring stable prices to stable exchanges. The currency and exchange policy of a country should be entirely subservient to the aim of raising output and employment to the right level. But the recent gyrations of the dollar have looked to me more like a gold standard on the booze than the ideal managed currency of my dreams.
14. You may be feeling by now, Mr President, that my criticism is more obvious than my sympathy. Yet truly that is not so. You remain for me the ruler whose general outlook and attitude to the tasks of government are the most sympathetic in the world. You are the only one who sees the necessity of a profound change of methods and is attempting it without intolerance, tyranny or destruction. You are feeling your way by trial and error, and are felt to be, as you should be, entirely uncommitted in your own person to the details of a particular technique. In my country, as in your own, your position remains singularly untouched by criticism of this or the other detail. Our hope and our faith are based on broader considerations.
15.If you were to ask me what I would suggest in concrete terms for the immediate future, I would reply thus.
16.In the field of gold-devaluation and exchange policy the time has come when uncertainty should be ended. This game of blind man's buff with exchange speculators serves no useful purpose and is extremely undignified. It upsets confidence, hinders business decisions, occupies the public attention in a measure far exceeding its real importance, and is responsible both for the irritation and for a certain lack of respect which exists abroad. You have three alternatives. You can devalue the dollar in terms of gold, returning to the gold standard at a new fixed ratio. This would be inconsistent with your declarations in favour of a long-range policy of stable prices, and I hope you will reject it. You can seek some common policy of exchange stabilisation with Great Britain aimed at stable price-levels. This would be the best ultimate solution; but it is not practical politics at the moment unless you are prepared to talk in terms of an initial value of sterling well below $5 pending the realisation of a marked rise in your domestic price-level. Lastly you can announce that you will definitely control the dollar exchange by buying and selling gold and foreign currencies so as to avoid wide or meaningless fluctuations, with a right to shift the parities at any time but with a declared intention only so to do either to correct a serious want of balance in America's international receipts and payments or to meet a shift in your domestic price level relatively to price-levels abroad. This appears to me to be your best policy during the transitional period. In other respects you would regain your liberty to make your exchange policy subservient to the needs of your domestic policy--free to let out your belt in proportion as you put on flesh.
17.In the field of domestic policy, I put in the forefront, for the reasons given above, a large volume of Loan-expenditures under Government auspices. It is beyond my province to choose particular objects of expenditure. But preference should be given to those which can be made to mature quickly on a large scale, as for example the rehabilitation of the physical condition of the railroads. The object is to start the ball rolling. The United States is ready to roll towards prosperity, if a good hard shove can be given in the next six months. Could not the energy and enthusiasm, which launched the N.I.R.A. in its early days, be put behind a campaign for accelerating capital expenditures, as wisely chosen as the pressure of circumstances permits? You can at least feel sure that the country will be better enriched by such projects than by the involuntary idleness of millions.
18.I put in the second place the maintenance of cheap and abundant credit and in particular the reduction of the long-term rates of interest. The turn of the tide in great Britain is largely attributable to the reduction in the long-term rate of interest which ensued on the success of the conversion of the War Loan. This was deliberately engineered by means of the open-market policy of the Bank of England. I see no reason why you should not reduce the rate of interest on your long-term Government Bonds to 2½ per cent or less with favourable repercussions on the whole bond market, if only the Federal Reserve System would replace its present holdings of short-dated Treasury issues by purchasing long-dated issues in exchange. Such a policy might become effective in the course of a few months, and I attach great importance to it.
19.With these adaptations or enlargements of your existing policies, I should expect a successful outcome with great confidence. How much that would mean, not only to the material prosperity of the United States and the whole World, but in comfort to men's minds through a restsration of their faith in the wisdom and the power of Government!
With great respect,
Your obedient servant
J M Keynes
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................................................................................................................................
Osei Kwame 8 years ago
Why do you waste your time Francis
Why do you waste your time Francis
Asonaba 8 years ago
Minuah Osei Kwame, Kwarteng is not wasting his time. We should be grateful that he is exposing the lies and and fallacies of Baidoo.
Minuah Osei Kwame, Kwarteng is not wasting his time. We should be grateful that he is exposing the lies and and fallacies of Baidoo.
YAW 8 years ago
Phil Baidoo, seems to write more in ignorance than in knowledge. What stops you from writing "the definitive guide to capitalism"? You seem to pick up more crap than most people do with a hoover.
Phil Baidoo, seems to write more in ignorance than in knowledge. What stops you from writing "the definitive guide to capitalism"? You seem to pick up more crap than most people do with a hoover.
KKO 8 years ago
Are you for real? Phillip has only been exposing the the inherent inconsistencies and plain lies in socialism and why even the most die-hard socialists ultimately run to the hated capitalist countries.
I have worked on N ... read full comment
Are you for real? Phillip has only been exposing the the inherent inconsistencies and plain lies in socialism and why even the most die-hard socialists ultimately run to the hated capitalist countries.
I have worked on North Korean projects and helped some of their technical people who came on attachment in London. It is not a system I would wish on my worst enemy. Count yourselves lucky that you can hide in Uncle Sam's bosom and spew out any crap that comes to your head!
Philip Kobina Baidoo 8 years ago
Thank you very much KKO.
Thank you very much KKO.
francis kwarteng 8 years ago
KKO,
You are as confused, and shameless as Baidoo.
I better leave you two wallow in your vomits.
Have a great weekend.
KKO,
You are as confused, and shameless as Baidoo.
I better leave you two wallow in your vomits.
Have a great weekend.
Ike Amankwah 8 years ago
Listen the pot calling the kettle you are black.
Listen the pot calling the kettle you are black.
Osei Kwame 8 years ago
Philip is at again. The usual nonsense. Too much time on your hands.
Philip is at again. The usual nonsense. Too much time on your hands.
Philip Kobina Baidoo 8 years ago
No problem I am on welfare so I have got plenty of time on my hands doing nothing at home like most of you think. Thank you
No problem I am on welfare so I have got plenty of time on my hands doing nothing at home like most of you think. Thank you
SOCIALISTS HAVE A GREAT UNHEALTHY HABIT OF ATTEMPTS AT REWRITING HISTORY, TO SUIT THEIR PROPAGANDA OBJECTIVES. THE TRUTH CAN NEVER BE SURPRESSED FOR TOO LONG. FACTS HAVE LIFE AND ALWAYS DISPROVES HALF TRUTHS AND OUTRIGHT LIES ...
read full comment
I am not sure you understand the fundementals 1 Keynes idea of state is different rom Marxism. Marxism dwells on state ownership that should result in communism.Keynes theory is dealing with cycles and what the state can do t ...
read full comment
IF SO MOVE TO LIVE IN VLADIMIR PUTIN'S RUSSIA, CUBA AND DO ONE BETTER, GO TO CHINA OR NORTH KOREA. DO GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND SILICON VALLEY BELONG TO UNCLE SAM????? FREE ENTERPRISE AND MARKET ECONOMICS IS TH ...
read full comment
The only important thing you have said here is the multiplier effect, and that can also be created in the private sector. You don't need the government to do that, which eventually leads to corruption. You live in the United ...
read full comment
Kojo T,
Don't mind them.
These shameless guys don't know what they are talking about.
They have been misrepresenting and distorting the facts almost on everything from the American meltdown, subprime and the forecl ...
read full comment
What is this baidoo guy trying to achieve?
Dear Philip Baidoo,
I will not waste my time dismissing your fallacies and inaccuracies but I shall concentrate on only one (other readers may do the rest; I have decided to ignore but a friend impressed upon me to respond ...
read full comment
Why do you waste your time Francis
Minuah Osei Kwame, Kwarteng is not wasting his time. We should be grateful that he is exposing the lies and and fallacies of Baidoo.
Phil Baidoo, seems to write more in ignorance than in knowledge. What stops you from writing "the definitive guide to capitalism"? You seem to pick up more crap than most people do with a hoover.
Are you for real? Phillip has only been exposing the the inherent inconsistencies and plain lies in socialism and why even the most die-hard socialists ultimately run to the hated capitalist countries.
I have worked on N ...
read full comment
Thank you very much KKO.
KKO,
You are as confused, and shameless as Baidoo.
I better leave you two wallow in your vomits.
Have a great weekend.
Listen the pot calling the kettle you are black.
Philip is at again. The usual nonsense. Too much time on your hands.
No problem I am on welfare so I have got plenty of time on my hands doing nothing at home like most of you think. Thank you