Catchy little ditty and it makes generalizations, for sure. The notion that saving money stifles the economy is ridiculous.

Savings accounts boost a banks total on deposit which boosts their ability to loan which boosts their ability to generate revenue from interest. People spend lent money. That's why they borrow it.

Saved money, depending on the type of account, can be taxed or generate taxable interest. Tax is revenue for the government.

Interest is revenue. Saving money can earn money.

Saved money is ultimately spent. The more saved is the more spent. Be it savings that were put away to make a particular large purchase or for retirement, the saved money gets spent.

Middle aged people are saving as old folks are spending their savings as kids are being spent on as young adults are spending to get to be middle aged when they can save to spend once they get old. The population grows and each cycle generates more savers who later spend.

Even if you die without spending the money, that money is inherited by people who will ultimately spend it. And then there's inheritance tax.

Save your money.

Well this was showing the extremes of economic thought. Unfortunately, we are following the extremes. I follow more of the Austrian philosophy, tempered by the needs of reality.

Saving money is good, but when you combine inflation from boom/bust cycles of manipulation with a fiat currency, you sabotage that quite effectively.

I LOVE in the video how he finds a Keynes book instead of a Bible, that made me laugh and cry at the same time because it is true.

And I deplored how Keynes was portrayed as a drunk. Was there bias shown?

You should save your money during booms, and spend during recessions, that is how you lessen the impact of down turns, and that is usually the opposite of what people and governments do.

Banks generate immense profits, but more for themselves than for the people whose money they use to gamble with.

Saved money might be money spent, but the times when people save and spend, can have positive or negative impacts on economic cycles. Saved money is money spent... in the future.

As the population grows there are less earners per retiree, which makes the future of social security look very interesting indeed.

Yes, since Hayek was just shown to be boring, while are more negative portrayal of him would be that of a miser.