
Polish: 
W ostatnim filmiku przejrzeliśmy sobie klasyczne spojrzenie na ekonomię oraz to jak keynesizm różni się w stosunku do klasycznej ekonomii, szczególnie w kontekście Wielkiego Kryzysu gdzie gospodarka działa poniżej swoich możliwości.
Co chcę zrobić w tym filmiku sprawdza się w czasach, kiedy gospodarka działa nie na miarę swoich możliwości.
Chcę powiedzieć Wam o tym, jak keynesizm może być niebezpieczny dla gospodarki.
Chciałbym podkreślić, że keynesizm jest często kojarzony z lewicą, w przypadku Stanów z partią demokratyczną.
Partia republikańska w ubiegłych latach rządzenia również stosowała politykę Keynsa, kiedy gospodarka zaczęła się pogarszać, chcieli ją stymulować poprzez przeniesienie zaagregowanego popytu w prawo.
Próbowali to zrobić jednak w inny sposób, na przykład przez obniżanie podatków zamiast zwiększania wydatków rządowych, więc jest to pewien rodzaj keynesizmu.

Portuguese: 
Em nosso último vídeo fizemos
uma revisão sobre
economia clássica e falamos
sobre como
o pensamento Keynesiano era
um ponto de partida
e principalmente, porque ele
talvez fizesse sentido
no contexto da Grande Depressão,
quando a economia estava operando
muito abaixo
do seu potencial.
O que quero fazer é--
Pode ser verdadeiro sempre que
a economia estiver funcionando
muito abaixo de seu potencial.
Neste vídeo quero falar sobre como
o pensamento Keynesiano pode,
às vezes, ser perigoso.
Uma coisa que enfatizarei
durante este vídeo
que o pensamento Keynesiano
é muitas vezes associado
com pessoas de esquerda,
com políticas de esquerda,
conhecidos como democratas
nos Estados Unidos.
Os republicanos também,
em sua maioria,
especialmente a principal
corrente republicanista,
em especial as últimas administrações
tem praticado o que apenas
pode ser descrito como
políticas Keynesianas.
Quando a economia começou a recuar,
eles tentaram reanimá-la
deslocando demanda agregada
para a direita de alguma maneira
e falaremos sobre como eles
tentaram fazer isso de um
modo diferente usando
cortes de impostos
ao invés de aumentos
nos gastos do governo,

English: 
Voiceover: In the last video
we had a little bit of review
of classical economics
and then we talked about
how Keynesian thinking was a departure,
especially, and why it
might have made sense
in the context of the Great Depression,
where the economy was operating well below
its potential.
What I want to do -
It may be true anytime that
the economy is operating
well below its potential.
What I want to talk about in this video
is how Keynesian thinking
can sometimes be dangerous.
One thing I do want to
emphasize over the course
of this video is Keynesian
policies are often associated
with people on the left,
with policies on the left,
democrats in the United States.
The republicans also, for the most part,
especially mainstream republicans,
especially the last
several administrations,
they have practiced what
can only be described
as Keynesian policies.
When the economy started
to recede, they tried
to stimulate it by shifting
aggregate demand to the right
somehow and we'll talk about
that they tried to do it
in a slightly different
way, through tax cuts,
instead of government spending increases,

Portuguese: 
mas no final a base daquele pensamento
era o Keynesianismo.
Agora para recapitular
um pouco,
falarei um pouco sobre os ciclos
que tínhamos visto
no vídeo anterior.
Se você tem a pessoa A, pessoa B,
pessoa C e pessoa D
ou talvez suas empresas.
B é fornecedora de A, A fornecedora
de D, D abastece C
e C abastece B. E, para simplificar
vamos dizer que
todas elas estão fornecendo
duas unidades de seus bens
e serviços umas às outras.
Digamos que C teve um mal pressentimento,
se sente pessimista,
comeu algo que lhe fez mal,
e de repente está inseguro
sobre seu futuro e
quer comprar menos,
apenas por precaução.
Talvez queira enterrar uma parte
de seu dinheiro
para o caso de C precisar.
Quer comprar menos de D,
mas D diz:
"Meu negócio vai mal e agora
eu não posso mais comprar
tantos bens e serviços,".
Então compra menos de A,
A faz o mesmo com B,
e agora o negócio de B
vai mal também e compra menos de C,
menos bens e serviços

Polish: 
Teraz, jako tło do zagrożeń keynesizmu, chcę Wam opowiedzieć raz jeszcze o cyklu, o którym mówiliśmy ostatnio.
Mieliśmy cztery osoby – A, B, C i D oraz ich firmy.
B dostarcza dobra A, A dostarcza je dla D, D dla C i C dla B. Aby ułatwić sprawę, przyjmijmy, że dostarczają sobie 2 jednostki jakiegoś dobra.
Powiedzieliśmy sobie, że C miało jakiś zły sen, coś mu się przewidziało, czuje się teraz pesymistycznie i w ramach ostrożności chce kupować mniej.
Będzie gromadził swoje pieniądze, na wypadek gdyby ich potrzebował.
Więc C kupuje teraz mniej od D, także D stwierdza, że jego firma źle operuje i nie może już sobie pozwolić na takie wydatki więc kupuje jedną jednostkę.
A robi to samo dla B, to samo dzieje się dla B, więc B kupuje mniej od C.

English: 
but it was Keynesian in
its underlying thinking.
Now just as a bit of a
backup, I'm going to talk
a little bit more about that
cycle that we talked about
in the last video.
If you have person A, person
B, person C, and person D
or maybe their firms.
B supplies A, A supplies D, D supplies C,
and C supplies B, and for
the sake of simplicity,
we said that they're all
supplying 2 units of their good
and service to each other.
Let's just say that C has a
bad dream, feels pessimistic,
ate something bad and all of
a sudden isn't feeling good
about the future and wants to buy less,
just out of caution.
Maybe he wants to hoard a bit of cash,
just in case C needs it.
He buys a little bit
less from D, but D says,
"Gee, my business is
bad, now I can't afford
"as many goods and
services," buys less from A,
A does the same thing from
B, and then B's business
is bad, so buys less stuff
from C, goods and services

Portuguese: 
de C. E agora C acredita que
previu a tendência.
Mesmo que saibamos que era,
uma profecia autorrealizável.
Foi o pessimismo de C, realmente
o que levou o mercado
à situação atual.
No pior dos casos, isso ficaria
cada vez pior.
C poderia dizer: "Eu fui pessimista,
mas estava certo"
"Meu negócio realmente ficou mal"
Talvez o cenário esteja pior
do que C esperava
e começa a dizer: "Vou comprar
ainda menos"
"Talvez compre apenas metade
do que comprava antes de D"
e D diga: "Comprarei apenas
metade de A",
e essa situação se tornaria
um círculo vicioso
até que cada um deles
compre exatamente
apenas o necessário, mesmo
que todos eles
possam produzir mais
e a economia
possa ser mais produtiva e
saudável, e todos eles
possam estar em uma situação
bem melhor.
Isto é, pelo menos para mim,
uma ótima descrição
do que acontece durante
uma depressão,
especialmente durante
a Grande Depressão.
Então pode haver uma justificativa
para dizer:
"Por que o governo não intercede
aqui, em algum ponto
dessa economia, e estimula
a demanda?"

English: 
from C, and now C feels
like they're psychic,
even though we see that it was actually
a self-fulfilling prophecy,
that C's pessimism actually led
to that reality actually occurring.
In a worst case, it actually
could get worse and worse.
C could say, "Wow, I was
pessimistic and I was right.
"My business actually did get bad."
Maybe it even got worse
than C had expected
and then C could then say,
"I'm going to buy even less.
"Maybe I'm only going to
buy a half from D now,"
and then D says, "Maybe I'm
only going to buy a half
"from A," and that cycle
could go down and down
and down until each of them
are just buying exactly
just what they need to get
by, even though they all
could be producing more,
the economy could be
producing more and could
be wealthier and they all
could be way better off.
This is, at least in my mind,
a pretty good description
of what happens in a depression,
especially the Great Depression.
So there might be a
rationale to say, "Hey, look,
"why doesn't the government
come here at some point
"in this economy and stimulate demand?"

Polish: 
Teraz C czuje się jak wróżbita, który przepowiedział przyszłość, chociaż nie wie o tym, że sam tą przyszłość zainicjował.
Pesymizm C sprawił, że jego wizja się spełniła.
Teraz może być jeszcze gorzej, ponieważ C może być przekonany o swoim złym przeczuciu i powie
„no tak, miałem rację, zrobiło się jeszcze gorzej niż podejrzewałem. Kupię teraz nawet mniej, może nawet 0.5 jednostki od D”
Wtedy D robi to samo i kupuje 0.5 jednostki od A, i cały cykl idzie w dół, aż każdy z nich kupuje tylko tyle, ile potrzebne mu jest do przetrwania.
Nawet jeśli mogliby produkować więcej, czyli innymi słowy ich gospodarka mogłaby produkować więcej, mogliby być bogatsi.
Moim zdaniem ta sytuacja bardzo dobrze odzwierciedla wydarzenia z Wielkiego Kryzysu.

Portuguese: 
"Por que o governo não ajuda?"
Digamos que B já compra
uma unidade de C,
e o governo diz: "Eu comprarei
outra unidade de C",
e então C diz, "As coisas estão
indo bem de novo".
"Posso comprar dois de D".
D pode comprar dois de A
e A pode comprar dois de B,
e B compra dois
de C. E assim, as coisas
voltam para seus
níveis potenciais.
A economia está acelerando.
Em um estado ideal,
o governo diria,
"Meu trabalho está feito."
"Posso dar um passo atrás,
não quero
estimular demais a economia."
"Não quero deslocar demais
a demanda agregada
para a direita e causar inflação",
e então o governo dará um
passo atrás.
O perigo aqui é que não e tão fácil
para o governo fazer isso.
Isto é um tipo de estímulo,
um tipo de
gasto governamental.
Pode ter sido uma redução
de impostos,
e por causa disso B aumentou
sua demanda,
mas de qualquer modo, uma vez feita
uma política assim,
e digamos que foi um
gasto do governo,
é muito difícil parar.
O gasto do governo
pode ter sido

Polish: 
Ktoś mógłby zapytać „czemu więc rząd nie przyjdzie na pomoc, aby zwiększyć popyt?” Więc teraz powiedzmy sobie, że B kupuje 1 jednostkę od C
a przychodzi rząd i mówi „dobra, kupimy jeszcze jedną jednostkę od C”. Więc C czuje się teraz pewnie, sytuacja się polepszyła, i mogę kupować dwie jednostki od D
D może kupować dwie jednostki od A, A może kupować dwie od B, a B może kupować dwie od C
Czyli sprawy wróciły do swojego pierwotnego stanu. Gospodarka odżyła.
Teraz, w idealnym świecie to rząd powinien stwierdzić, że jego praca się tutaj kończy i wycofać się z tego przedsięwzięcia.
Rząd nie chce przegrzać gospodarki, nie chce przesunąć krzywej zaagregowanego popytu za daleko i wywołać inflację, więc odsunie się od tego przedsięwzięcia
Jednak tutaj pojawia się pierwsze ryzyko – nie jest łatwo wycofać się rządowi z takiego przedsięwzięcia.
Rząd coś wykupił, być może nawet zmniejszył jakiś podatek i jest trudno cofnąć takie działanie.

English: 
Why doesn't the government come here?
Let's say B is already buying 1 from C,
the government comes and
says, "Hey, I'll buy another 1
"from C," and then C says,
"Hey, things are good again.
I can buy 2 from D," D can buy 2 from A,
and then A can buy 2 from
B and then B can buy 2
from C and so things have gotten back
to their potential state.
The economy is revving.
In an ideal state, the
government would say,
"Hey, my work is done now.
"I can now take a step
back and I don't want
"to overheat the economy.
"I don't want to push
aggregate demand too far
"to the right and cause
inflation," so they will take
a step back.
The danger here is that
this is not so easy
for governments to do.
This was some type of stimulus, some type
of government spending.
Although maybe it was a tax decrease,
so maybe B could've
increased their demand,
but either way, once you
do a policy like this,
and let's say it was government spending,
it's very hard to unwind.
This government spending might have been

Portuguese: 
um projeto do qual
alguns gostaram,
que talvez tenha empregado
muitas pessoas.
Estas pessoas são votantes.
Elas não vão se sentar e
assistir você cancelar
o projeto governamental.
É um risco que talvez
haja justificativa para
a política Keynesiana, mas quando
chega a hora de desfazer
esta política, de cortar
os estímulos,
É muito difícil
de fazer isso.
Você fica preso a essa política.
O que acontece é que quando
as coisas estão ruins,
você tenta um estímulo Keynesiano,
mas quando tudo vai bem
você não consegue desfazê-la,
e se este estímulo
envolve um déficit cada vez maior
e cada vez mais despesas
governamentais
então o tamanho do governo
aumentará
relativamente à economia, ou
o déficit aumentará
em relação à economia, 
e não conseguirá
desfazer mais essa política,
pois isso seria impopular.
Quero deixar claro que isso vale
tanto para a esquerda
como para a direita.
Em teoria, a esquerda talvez diria,
"Vamos fazer um estímulo Keynesiano
gastando mais,
assim o governo gasta mais,
e deixemos
a nossa receita constante,
nossa receita fiscal,
vamos deixa-la constante."
Claro, o governo teria que pedir
dinheiro emprestado

English: 
for a project that some people like,
it might have employed many, many people.
Those people are voters.
They're not just going to
sit there while you cancel
this government project.
There's a risk that maybe
there is a justification
for a Keynesian policy,
but when it's time to undo
that Keynesian policy,
to undo that stimulus,
it's very hard to do it.
It's kind of a sticky policy.
What you might have is when times are bad,
you do Keynesian stimuli,
but when times are good,
you're not willing to undo it
and if that Keynsian stimuli
involves more and more deficit spending
or more and more government spending,
then the government size
is just going to grow
relative to the economy, or
the deficit is just going
to grow relative to the
economy and you're never going
to unwind it, because
unwinding is unpopular.
I want to be clear that this
is true of both the left
and the right.
In the stereotypical
sense, the left might say,
"Hey, let's do a Keynesian
stimulus by spending more,"
so the government spends
more and let's hold
our revenue constant, our tax revenue,
let's hold it constant.
Obviously, the government
would have to borrow

Polish: 
Wydatki rządu na to przedsięwzięcie mogło zyskać poparcie wielu osób, gdyby się teraz wycofał wiele osób mogłoby stracić pracę, a ci ludzie są wyborcami.
Nie będą po prostu siedzieć i patrzeć jak rząd wycofuje się z przedsięwzięcia, które im się podoba.
Tutaj właśnie leży to niebezpieczeństwo.
Oczywiście istnieje wiele powodów, dlaczego powinniśmy zastosować politykę keynesizmu, ale kiedy już to zrobimy bardzo ciężko się z niej wycofać.
Kiedy czasy są złe, chcemy podkręcić gospodarkę poprzez keynesizm. Jednak w dobrych czasach nie chcemy jej wycofać, chociaż powinniśmy to zrobić.
Mimo że jest to wykonalne fizycznie to nie jest to popularne rozwiązanie dla rządów na całym świecie, jest ono rzadko wykorzystywane.
Chcę pokazać Wam, że to co mówię jest prawdziwe dla prawicy i dla lewicy.
W stereotypowym świecie, lewica może chcieć zastosować keynesizm poprzez zwiększenie wydatków.

English: 
more money to fund this, or
sometimes they might even
increase taxes if they actually
wanted to be more purist
about it, but this is
the variety that you see
and this would be a true stimulus.
This is using the fiscal
lever to put more demand
in the economy, but in
the right you often see
the other side.
You see taxes being
lowered, essentially saying
instead of the government spending it,
why don't we let people
decide where to spend it
and they might spend it
in a more efficient way,
but it's going to be a
stimulus, because spending
is held constant.
Then you have the double
where you do both sides
of it, where you lower the taxes,
you lower the inbound revenue,
and you increase spending.
This is true, this has been
done by both republican
and democratic administrations.
Lowering taxes, but
then going and starting
a hugely expensive war and obviously
this would increase deficits.
There might even be a
justification for doing any
of these, a Keynesian
justification if the economy truly
is operating well below its potential.
The tough thing is it might be justified,

Polish: 
Więc rząd wydaje więcej, ale zostawia podatki na tym samym poziomie. Oczywiście rząd będzie musiał się zapożyczyć, żeby zafundować taką operację, czasem może nawet zwiększyć podatki
Jednak taki rodzaj bodźca dla gospodarki jest odpowiedni – to fiskalny środek nacisku, aby zwiększyć popyt gospodarki. Ale w prawicy mamy odwrotną sytuację.
Podatki zostają obniżone, ponieważ rząd stwierdza, że to ludzie najlepiej wiedzą gdzie zainwestować pieniądze, a nie państwo
Ludzie wydadzą to w odpowiedniejszy sposób. Jednak będzie to rodzaj bodźca, ponieważ wydatki zostają na tym samym poziomie.
Takie działanie było wykorzystywane przez partie demokratyczne i republikańskie.
Często to sprawi, że deficyt będzie większy. Jest nawet na to wytłumaczenie, nawet w ramach keynesizmu, ponieważ gospodarka operuje poniżej swoich możliwości.

Portuguese: 
para financiar isso, ou talvez
precise até mesmo
aumentar os impostos se ele quiser
ser mais purista
sobre esse assunto. Mas esta é
a variedade que você verá
e este será um estímulo
verdadeiro.
Está usando a alavanca fiscal
para aumentar a demanda
na economia. Mas na direita,
você normalmente verá
o outro lado.
Verá os impostos diminuindo.
O que diz basicamente
"Ao invés de o governo
gastar isso,
deixemos o povo escolher
onde gastar este dinheiro."
Talvez eles gastem de forma
mais eficiente
mesmo assim, será um estímulo,
porque os gastos
são mantidos em um nível
constante.
E depois tem a dupla, onde podemos
ver os dois lados disso,
onde você diminui os impostos,
diminui as receitas de entrada,
e aumenta os gastos.
Isso tem sido feito tanto por
administrações republicanas
como por democratas.
Diminuindo impostos, mas
começando também
uma enorme e cara guerra
e, claro,
isso aumentaria o déficit.
Talvez seja justificável
aplicar qualquer uma
dessas políticas, uma justificativa Keynesiana,
se a economia realmente estiver
operando muito abaixo
de seu potencial.
O difícil aqui é que,
mesmo justificada,

Polish: 
Jednak problem zaczyna się na definicji możliwości gospodarki – nikt do końca nie wie gdzie jest ten punkt. Możemy nie być w stanie tego cofnąć kiedy dojdziemy już do granicy mozliwości,
a potem możemy tylko przegrzać gospodarkę, co prowadzi do inflacji. Kolejnym negatywem keynesizmu jest to co dzieje się w długim okresie.
W krótkim okresie, to myślenie ma wiele sensu. Podkręćmy gospodarkę, cykl będzie się powtarzać i wszystko wróci do normy.
Jednak w długim okresie, ludzie konsumują coraz więcej i więcej.
Często usłyszycie, że kiedy gospodarka spowalnia to prezydent czy politycy mówią, że starają się, aby obywatele wydawali więcej poprzez keynesizm. Mogą obniżyć podatki lub podwyższyć swoje wydatki.
Nigdy nie usłyszycie od rządu, że chce aby ludzie oszczędzali pieniądze, aby rząd mógł inwestować więcej tak jak jest to w klasycznym ujęciu.
W Stanach jest inna sytuacja, ponieważ ten kraj ma swojego rodzaju przepustkę.

Portuguese: 
você não sabe exatamente
qual é o potencial
e talvez não consiga se desfazer isso
quando o potencial
for alcançado, e talvez
superaqueça
a economia, o que levaria ao
aumento da inflação
e isso pode prejudicar ainda mais
sua produtividade
econômica atual.
Outro ponto negativo do
pensamento Keynesiano
é sobre o que acontecerá
no longo prazo.
No curto prazo, isto pode
fazer muito sentido.
Vamos impulsionar a economia.
Façamos esse ciclo funcionar
bem novamente. Mas no
longo prazo,
o plano é fazer as pessoas
consumirem
cada vez mais.
Sempre que a economia
desacelerar um pouco,
você ouvirá o presidente dizer,
ouvirá os políticos dizer: 
"Nós apenas estamos
incentivando as pessoas
a gastarem mais
usando uma combinação dessas
políticas Keynesianas."
"Diminuiremos os impostos,
aumentaremos os gastos",
Mas você nunca os ouvirá
dizendo,
"Queremos que as pessoas
poupem mais
para que possamos 
investir mais,
para que, no sentido clássico,
possamos aumentar
nossa capacidade 
total de produção.
Os Estados Unidos tem um passe livre
sobre isso,
pois o que eles tem feito é,
essencialmente,
gastos deficitários que serviram

English: 
you actually don't know
exactly where that potential is
and you might not be able
to unwind this once you get
to your potential and
then you might overheat
the economy, might lead to inflation,
and that actually might
undermine the productivity
of the actual economy.
The other negative of a Keynesian mindset
is what happens over the long run.
In the short run this
might make a lot of sense.
Let's prime the pump, let's
get the cycle to happen
in the right away again,
but in the long run,
it's essentially just trying
to get people to consume
and consume more.
You'll often hear, when
the economy slows down
a little bit, you'll hear the president,
you'll hear politicians
say, "Hey, we're just trying
"to get people to spend more
"through some combination
of these Keynesian policies.
"We're going to lower taxes,
we're going to increase
"spending,"but you'll never hear them say,
"Hey, we want people to save more,
"so that we can invest more,
"so that in the classical
sense we can increase
"our total productive capacity."
The US has gotten a free pass on this,
because the US has been
doing, essentially,
the deficit spending has been able to do

Portuguese: 
de estímulos Keynesianos. E é por isso
que os consumidores americanos
continuam gastando mais e
poupando menos dinheiro.
O governo está fazendo
isso também,
mas além disso, os Estados Unidos
recebem investimentos
pois são os estrangeiros os que
estiveram poupando
e depois gastando
esse dinheiro
ao investir nos Estados Unidos,
assim o país
poderia aumentar sua produtividade,
mas isso é um risco
para um país que não tem
esse passe livre
que os EUA tiveram desde
as últimas décadas.
Pois quando você tem
alguns recursos
Em um certo ano, você tem
alguns recursos.
Digamos que é a sua hora.
Você pode caçar e
comer coelhos
ou poderia gastar seu tempo
inventando
uma armadilha de captura
de coelhos.
Isto aqui é caçar e
comer coelhos
e isto aqui é passar seu tempo
tentando descobrir como ser
mais produtivo
na caça de coelhos, construindo
arcos e flechas
ou coisas do gênero.
Sempre há uma troca
entre consumo
e investimento.
Políticas Keynesianas
são sobre
elevar o consumo ao nível
mais alto possível
e essa pode ser uma boa ideia
no curto prazo

Polish: 
USA ma deficyt jeśli chodzi o wydatki, jednak jest w stanie zastosować politykę keynesizmu, dlatego konsument w Stanach wydaje coraz więcej, a oszczędza coraz mniej.
Rząd robi dokładnie to samo. Jednak w Stanach jest też dużo inwestycji, ponieważ to obcokrajowcy oszczędzają i inwestują w Stany.
W ten sposób USA jest w stanie podwyższyć swoją produktywność.
Jednak jest to ryzyko dla państwa, który nie jest obdarzony takim błogosławieństwem jakim jest przepustka w Stanach.
Kiedy masz jakiś zasób, powiedzmy że jest to Twój czas
Możesz albo polować na zające i je jeść, albo spędzać czas na wymyślaniu nowych pułapek na zające.
Więc to jest polowanie i jedzenie zajęcy, a to jest inwestycja czyli jak być bardziej produktywnym w polowaniu na zające
Zawsze musisz coś wymienić kosztem drugiego, wybór mamy między inwestycją a konsumpcją.

English: 
the Keynesian stimuli and
that's why the US consumer
keeps spending more and
more, saving less and less.
The government is doing the same thing,
but the US has also
been getting investment
because it's the foreigners
who've been saving
and then plowing that
money and they've been,
essentially, investing
in the US, so that the US
could increase its productive
capacity, but that is a risk
for a country if it's not
blessed with that free pass
that the US has gotten for
the last several decades
is that when you have some resources,
so in a given year, you
have some resources.
Let's say it's your time.
You could either hunt and eat rabbits
or you could spend your time to invent
new rabbit trapping devices.
This is the hunting and eating the rabbits
and this is spending some time to go
and figure out ways to be more productive
at hunting rabbits,
building some bow and arrows
or something like this.
You always have a tradeoff
between consumption
and investment.
Keynesian policies,
they're all about, hey,
let's get consumption as high as possible
and that might be a good
idea in the short run,

Portuguese: 
especialmente se estamos operando
muito abaixo da nossa capacidade,
de nossa capacidade
total de produção,
mas pode ser um risco no longo prazo,
se você não tiver um
passe livre, pois talvez se esteja
sub-investindo.
E não poderá deslocar
o potencial à direita.
[Legendado por: Karoline]
[Revisado por: Joyce Vázquez]

Polish: 
W keynesizmie chodzi o to, żeby konsumpcja była na najwyższym poziomie, a to może być dobry pomysł tylko w krótkim okresie, szczególnie jeśli operujemy poniżej swoich możliwości.
Jednak może to być zagrożenie w długim okresie, jeśli nie mamy przepustki.
Możemy mieć za mało inwestycji, a w klasycznym ujęciu nie jesteś w stanie przesunąć swoich możliwości w prawo.

English: 
especially if we are operating
well below our potential,
well below our full capacity utilization,
but it could be a risk in the
long run, if you don't get
the free pass, because you
might have underinvestment
and in the classical sense,
you're never able to move
your potential to the right.
