Keynesian Theory is Not Economic

Russ Roberts wrote an interesting article [keynes vs reality-2] where he discusses some of the wrong predictions of Samuelson. Samuelson was wrong in his forecast for the economic post-war effects because he tried to predict economic events using a wrong theory: Keynesian theory. I doubt that exist a so absurd theory as Keynesian one. It is a theory full of superficialities, falsehoods, tautologies, and contradictions. But this theory is the mantra that all interventionists use to enforce their social excesses. I leave here the comment I added to this note published by Roberts.

"I have repeated several times, here in Cafe, that the Keynesian problem is not an economic problem. Mankind has trouble to meet their needs for goods, all of which are scarce, forcing its members to maintain a constant battle against a shortage, so that prosperity expresses small advances in that battle. A theory of this problem is an economic theory. But Keynes did not theorizes about this problem. Keynes, and their fanatical followers, says that the obstacle to overcome is not scarcity but 'abundance' because the goods are here but men can not afford them. Then for Keynes the problem is solved if men have the means to acquire these goods. Clearly, Keynes’s theory is 'not' an economic theory. Or, as Roberts says, the Keynesian statement is tautological... This fact should limit the debate between Keynesian and Austrian, because their theories are theories of two different problems and therefore they are not consistently comparable…".