But you're wrong. If you look at economic records going back to the middle ages, you can see the effect of Keynesian economics, central banks, social safety nets, social security systems, etc. Have had on reducing slumps and unemployment. We've gotten very, very good at it. In the 1600's, there were great depression-style crashes every 5 years or so. Despite massive wars, pandemics, geopolitics, and automation, economic slumps and unemployment have been incredibly moderate the past 90 years or so, and they have gotten milder as a function of time over that timeframe.
I didn't downvote you but .. it can easily be argued that the reduced slumps is because of the liberalisation of trade and reduced central control of money. e.g. floating currencies.
It has also been plausibly argued that the great depression was lengthened (and possibly deepened) by things like the New Deal.
Re:All Is Orwell
by PoignardAzur on Wednesday May 26, 2021 @04:41AM
(#27287910)
Fair enough. To reformulate my point: no system has been successful at eliminating them completely.
Social safety nets and technological progress do improve life outcomes a lot.
Most of the world has settled on capitalism because it solves a specific class of coordination problems really well, and targeted intervention can stave off the externalities enough to make the system bearable.
Slumps and unemployment aren't, like, an avoidable curse, but they're pretty damn hard to avoid, and so far no system has had real success.