I think that the Keynesian philosophy has a lot more valid aspects. At first I was wondering why Adam Smith would be known as the "father of modern economics", since he lived in the 1700's. I figured that Keynes, who lived during the 1900's, would have been more modern. After doing research, I saw that Keynes had a lot of the same views as Smith, and that Keynes wouldn't have probably came up with his own philosophy without the help of Smith's. I don't feel that either philosophy was wrong. Smith's Classical philosophy went along with his time period pretty much. If he could have seen the future I think he would have felt slightly different about certain things. Keynes philosophy goes along with modern day economics. These are some of things I learned about the two philosophies.
             Classical economists argue that no matter how much households save, businesses will always want to borrow every dollar for capital investment.
             Smith opposed any government intervention.
             Capitalist, in particular supports Smith's policy. They suggested that child labor laws, maximum labor laws, and factory health codes violated their rights.
             Smith strongly favored anti-monopoly laws.
             Smith believed that as long as markets grew, an increase demand in labor would prevent owners from exploiting their workers.
             John Maynard Keynes challenged the theories of classical economists in the great depression of the 1930s
             Keynes believed the general cause of the Great Depression in the 1930s was a collapse in aggregate demand.
             Keynes thought that the more specific reason for the Great Depression was a large drop in private investment due to pessimistic expectations.
             To fight a depression Keynes said that the government should spend a lot of money.
             Keynesian economics implies that government action is needed to counteract the business cycle.
             Keynesian's believe the government should actively intervene in the ...