Oh my god. I am just starting a macro class and I can already foresee many arguments with my professor.
She started off by asking why we need government. I answered that no one needs the state except for those who wish to enrich themselves by stealing what is not theirs. She laughed it off and some bonehead said governments make a nation more efficient. She agreed and said the government is wise and can step in to save the economy after a market failure.
I responded by saying that, unfortunately for Keyensians, that idea has been thouroughly discredited by facts and history and the government can only meddle in the economy to its detriment. Then she cited - of all things - the Great Depression and the New Deal as proof to the contrary. I laughed and didn’t say another word. I figured there was no use in going any further on the second day of class. This is going to be a very interesting semester to say the least.
In the future I will post some arguments we have and might need help from some of the more experienced people here. Arguing with a statist just goes around in circles always.
Tim, if I were you, I’d find another class to take, this one could be a waste of your time really. About the only thing I can think of that a government is more ‘efficient’ at is STEALING (aka taxes). Unfortunately insecure sheeple find comfort in the idea that something (government) is out there ‘protecting’ them. Until they remove the fear for themselves (monumental task that that is too), no one or nothing told to them will steer (yes as in cattle/herd) them away from their desparate clinging to the ‘security’ that they so need. (and obviously haven’t found IN themselves)
It is curious though that she should reference events that Keynesian economics cannot adequately explain and decides to omit the system’s numerous failures. For the OP’s own benefit, Rothbard’s MES has a section on Keynes in chapter 11, well worth reading, as is Hoppe’s demolition of the Keynesian system. It’s best to read the former first, as the latter depends on background knowledge of the subject.
I’ll be looking forward to your updates. But I would second the advice to ask questions rather than make assertions. You’re not going to convince her that you’re right - but you can show your classmates how bankrupt her ideas are by posing questions for which she has no good answer. And by not seeming pugnacious you’re less likely to be given a poor grade by a bitter and vindictive prof.