(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Here are some snippets from that summarize these two different types of Economics.

Keynesian Economics:



Austrian Economics:



Feel free to do more research on each respective topic so you can provide a more insightful answer and one based off of facts.

Here is my stance on these two types of economics.

I personally feel that Austrian economics is what would be able to keep an economy going better. Under Austrian economics, there is less government regulations, and there is less taxation on the wealthy, and corporations in general. Under Austrian economics, the elected officials on not concerned with ruling over the people, and they believe in free markets and free enterprise. Most people nowadays don't really realize this, but most elected officials around the world believe in the Keynesian approach to economics. Countries like China, USA, Canada, Italy, Greece, Spain, France and other countries all have Keynesian leaning approaches when it comes to dealing with their fiscal problems.

So, what is exactly Keynesian economics for those of you who don't really like to read? Well it's essentially spend. Spend spend spend and spend some more. Keynesian's believe in huge bailouts, and believe in higher taxation for those at the top so that they essentially can spend more money on the public sector. These people are very public sector oriented and do not believe in the private sector. Essentially within Keynesian economics, there is a circular flow of money, where the government taxes and collects, and spends more money. The so called "stimulus" is supposedly supposed to create more jobs, and is supposed to create more wealth, even if they are spending a lot. Another typical approach, is spending huge amounts of money when there is a big problem. Essentially, the larger the problem, the more money and the more taxes the government is supposed to spend in order to correct that problem. Call it, spending more money to get out of debt for example.

So what is the problem? Well first of all, it doesn't work. Keynesian economics has been tried in numerous countries, and has really failed. And yet it seems people do not learn from this. Huge corporate bailouts, more government "stimulus" usually does not help the economy, and is just an increasing amount of tax dollars being spent. So what does this do? Well it diminishes the value of the dollar, and it puts more pressure on those at the very top to pay more taxes. What happens when those at the top (who just so happen to employ people) have to pay more taxes? Corporations loose productivity, and they will be forced to either increase their prices, or loose jobs in order to cover the costs. The more the government asks for, the more jobs lost.

This is why I believe that Austrian economics works best. I believe that government is the problem in these cases, and that steering markets is really just steering markets into a wall. The private sector of the economy does anything better than the government can. I believe that having free markets and fewer regulations on businesses will encourage more competition, and more innovation for all. I believe that this is the approach countries that are failing right now should be on. They should shift their focus away from asking those at the top to pay more and more money, and they should focus more on creating overall more productivity.

So what is your stance on these economic policies? Do you think the Keynesian approach or the Austrian approach works best?
Now that you got through that huge lump of text, enjoy this video: