The second thing that struck me was that it is not increased savings that Keynesians are talking about but an increase in the demand for money. Two entirely different things. This has the effect of increasing investment in more roundabout stages of production that will raise the productivity of labour. This is what the classical economists meant when they said that to save is to spend. The total effect is to lengthen and make more productive a country's capital structure.
Saving is what fuelled the Industrial Revolution and what really fuelled the 'Asian miracle'.
It is no accident that these Asian success stories had high growth rates when one considers their high savings ratios. Growth means capital accumulation and you cannot accumulate capital without savings, i.e., forgoing consumption. But according to Switzer these countries should be deeply depressed while low-saving countries like Australia should have booming economies and zilch unemployment. The Austrian School also demonstrates why depressed economies need more savings and not less. Monetary booms create malinvestments that eventually reveal themselves in the form of idle capital and labour.