Will an economic stimulus package help us during recession?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PenguinsFan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
And neither is the other stuff done by the middle class a sin.
Loving money above God is a sin, I don’t care what class you’re in. Overspending and not paying your bills, some think constitute stealing. I think ppl just get in over their heads, like the owner of our home–like my wife talks about a few posts up. It happens to all of us, tho. Florida real estate made it easy for many to buy low, sell high, and it worked for a time.

Who said it’s a sin? I must’ve missed that comment. Making poor business decisions doesn’t have to equal sin. It can. If it’s motivated by greed, then yeah.
 
(continued)

I hate to say it, but I guess I would favor extending unemployment benefits, making the tax cuts permanent and letting the economy disinflate itself, even though it’s going to take a big bite out of my own “paper wealth”. It’s just a question of whether it happens fast or slow; whether the pain is seemingly endless, or short and sharp. Giving me an extra $500 or whatever to go blow on Chinese imports is of no value at all. Bringing interest rates down will not tempt me to borrow more, and right now, I shouldn’t borrow more. Some of those Chinese billionaires need to go bust. Some of the Russian oil barons need to hit the financial wall. Some of those banks need to take their multibillion dollar charge offs, and some mortgage companies and brokerages need to go under. And the stockholder suits against the executives that bought subprime while making millions personally need to be filed. The demand for oil needs to come sharply down. Then we’ll see its price go down, and its price effect on everything else go down with it. Recession does that. It always has.

And while the pain of restructuring goes on, those who want to punish the rich can take comfort in the fact that the rich take big hits in recessions too. And those who want to increase government spending for anything but unemployment benefits need to be shamed in public for it. The piper’s here with his hand out, and the pretending needs to stop.

And to those who want to say I’m cruel, let me say again that I’m going to share in the pain. Already am. But none of the halfway measures, or the recriminations or the political posturings are going to do any good at all. We’re in for a rough time, and the only question is how prolonged it’s going to be.
 
I used to be a Democrat, but I’m not a Republican either. I am very much inclined to agree with “iamrefreshed” on this. I am not an economist, but I am old enough to have lived through these things before. They’re never fun, and they’re never pretty, and the lessons never get learned, seems like.

Just having lived through them, it seems to me there are some common characteristics. Seems there is a combination of governmental policies that warp investment decisions, combined with easy monetary policies and unwise governmental fiscal decisions, all of which bump up against economic realities at some point.

We have a really insane tax situation which, on one hand, encouraged investment through reductions in the capital gains and dividend taxes, but then held the “sword of Damocles” over it by making it temporary. If ever there was anything better designed to make people try to “ride to the top, then jump off” I can’t imagine what it could be. The consequence of “jumping off” destroys a staggering amount of wealth, and we’re seeing that right now. I can’t imagine how many trillions of dollars of wealth have been destroyed in the last few months from the stock market alone, and not just the wealth of the rich, either. So, on Wall Street, we have a “perfect storm” going, of people who figured they would have to get out at some point, and before 2009, to avoid tax increases, plus people needing, at the same time, to use that wealth due to increased inflation, plus massive destruction of wealth in the real estate and stock markets.

To ensure eventual recession, Greenspan pumped up the money supply and reduced interest rates, and for what? Because he was afraid of deflation? That’s what he said. But all the while, the only prices that were going down were the prices of ever-increasing cheap imported goods. And people couldn’t spend enough on consumer goods, and China couldn’t build factories fast enough to supply the stuff, or to burn oil fast enough to produce it. Cheap toys went down, but oil didn’t. Commodities started climbing.

Because of the increases in the money supply, lenders found themselves awash in funds; funds they had to loan out. I remember, not long ago, that banks, brokerages and mortgage companies were in a bind because they had so much money they had trouble loaning it out.

So, giving the whole thing a wink and a nod, they all started being incautious in their lending practices. Watching it happen, and being an old guy who had seen it before, I KNEW the piper would come around for payment. I saw lenders approving 45% payment to income ratios (thats gross income, mind you) and refinances that were 20% or more over last year’s appraisal. Crazy stuff. And people saw those low interest rates and just couldn’t borrow enough money, yes, to pay off credit cards that soon refilled, to buy cars, to buy boats, to make a down payment on a vacation home, to play games “flipping” real estate, to pretend to be “day traders”. Craziness.

And, while it was all happening, the Congress larded up the budget, yes, on credit. And everybody pretended there was no piper.

I remember the early 1980s, and I remember how painful that recession was, for me as well as others. I remember how easy it was to resent Reagan and Paul Volker, and I did. But after it was all over, and uncountable dollars in bogus wealth disappeared, a person could go on, and assets formed a base that had more to do with their productive value than their speculative value. And the economy recovered and, the government came close to a surplus until the fed and the Congress went wild again. And, in truth, if anyone could claim credit for it, it would be Ronald Reagan and Paul Volker, and nobody else.

In passing, I might mention that almost nobody seems to notice that they DID reduce social security benefits, and the Dem Congress went along with it. It’s almost a state secret. Nobody talks about it.

(continued)
I remember the 80’s recession, I was wonderin when someone was gonna bring it up.😦 (I was half hoping no one would!) 😊 I get especially concerned when it comes to our kids. What is gonna be left for them?
 
(continued)

I hate to say it, but I guess I would favor extending unemployment benefits, making the tax cuts permanent and letting the economy disinflate itself, even though it’s going to take a big bite out of my own “paper wealth”. It’s just a question of whether it happens fast or slow; whether the pain is seemingly endless, or short and sharp. Giving me an extra $500 or whatever to go blow on Chinese imports is of no value at all. Bringing interest rates down will not tempt me to borrow more, and right now, I shouldn’t borrow more. Some of those Chinese billionaires need to go bust. Some of the Russian oil barons need to hit the financial wall. Some of those banks need to take their multibillion dollar charge offs, and some mortgage companies and brokerages need to go under. And the stockholder suits against the executives that bought subprime while making millions personally need to be filed. The demand for oil needs to come sharply down. Then we’ll see its price go down, and its price effect on everything else go down with it. Recession does that. It always has.

And while the pain of restructuring goes on, those who want to punish the rich can take comfort in the fact that the rich take big hits in recessions too. And those who want to increase government spending for anything but unemployment benefits need to be shamed in public for it. The piper’s here with his hand out, and the pretending needs to stop.

And to those who want to say I’m cruel, let me say again that I’m going to share in the pain. Already am. But none of the halfway measures, or the recriminations or the political posturings are going to do any good at all. We’re in for a rough time, and the only question is how prolonged it’s going to be.
Not to spin off on a China tangent, but China w/its defective products and GL lawsuits are not gonna be able to just snap back. The gigs up, but don’t blame them. Blame why we were ignoring the quality control issues on THIS end before bringing the China imports into this country. :mad:

Once they work out the kinks, the products will be pricier, and we won’t be able to afford the stuff anyways…because we’ll be in a? recession. Can u say vicious cycle?🤷

On your last paragraph, I’m afraid u could be right. Your comments, I could’ve written. Except i’m a repub. So u think like a repub, mind as well come back, Ridge.😃
 
Don’t u remember the $300 everyone rec’d when Bush got into office?😃 O.k., i am obviously being sarcastic.
That would be helpful, but it’s not enough.
No, I am of course saying for the middle class/upper m.c. You seem to have a bone to pick w/the wealthy. :confused:
No more than our Lord did during His earthly ministry.
Only 4% of the population hold 90%of the wealth in this country.
This is a problem. Let’s just exampine one aspect of biblical life…the Jubilee. Every 50th year, debts were forgiven, slaves set free and land was distributed back to the family that originally owned it. It was a leveling that occurred every 50 years and it’s God’s plan.
So, that leaves 96% of the rest of us who could get there. Being wealthy doesn’t just happen. Any able bodied american has an oppty to make it happen, but it can be easier to point fingers.
Thing is, the 4% like their little club. While it’s true that almost anybody has an opportunity, it’s very difficult. I would be more comfortable if the distribution graph were a little bit flatter.
But to answer your question, yes, for the mid class. Also, wealth can mean different things to different ppl. My wife and I are upper m.c., but to someone living in a 3rd world country we might be seen as “wealthy.” Let’s define wealth, shall we? maybe that’s a better place to start.
Which is why it’s important to compare apples to apples. The United States has a certain standard of living and we should make our comparison based on that, not on some notion of “well, the middle class in [name a country] would be consider poor in the US.” Bear in mind, most developing nations don’t even HAVE a middle class and ours is disappearing.
 
I remember the 80’s recession, I was wonderin when someone was gonna bring it up.😦 (I was half hoping no one would!) 😊 I get especially concerned when it comes to our kids. What is gonna be left for them?
As with the 1980s recession, a few years after the bloodletting, you and they will be enjoying an economy based on productivity, not speculation financed by “funny money”. And hopefully, the political parties and the fed will have learned a lesson; at least for awhile.

Your kids and you will be fine in the long run. This is something that happens every now and again, but there’s a sort of “ratcheting” effect to it over time.
 
No more than our Lord did during His earthly ministry.

Jesus didn’t dislike the wealthy or wealth. He disliked greed, and the love of money. Big distinction.

This is a problem. Let’s just exampine one aspect of biblical life…the Jubilee. Every 50th year, debts were forgiven, slaves set free and land was distributed back to the family that originally owned it. It was a leveling that occurred every 50 years and it’s God’s plan.

Would require everyone to be like minded on that, tho. I am Catholic, but I don’t think my gov’t needs to believe what I do to achieve a successful plan that could keep us out of a recession. (or lessen the duration of it)

Thing is, the 4% like their little club. While it’s true that almost anybody has an opportunity, it’s very difficult. I would be more comfortable if the distribution graph were a little bit flatter.

Agree here.

Which is why it’s important to compare apples to apples. The United States has a certain standard of living and we should make our comparison based on that, not on some notion of “well, the middle class in [name a country] would be consider poor in the US.” Bear in mind, most developing nations don’t even HAVE a middle class and ours is disappearing.
You reversed what i said, which is not what i said. But, i’ll let it go. I hear ya.
 
On your last paragraph, I’m afraid u could be right. Your comments, I could’ve written. Except i’m a repub. So u think like a repub, mind as well come back, Ridge.😃
Well, PF, I’m not a Dem or a Repub. Used to be a Dem, but now I’m just nothing, because the Dem party ran off and left me when it endorsed abortion as an article of faith. I just know that these recessions happen no matter who is in power, and none of these “fixes” that any of them have to offer are anything but posturing. I hate it. I really do. But when Greenspan cranked up the money supply and dropped interest rates so low that everybody got drunk on it, the die was cast. The “perfect storm” is here. The government can make the tax cuts permanent so people have one less reason to “jump overboard” in panic. No matter what anybody thinks about the tax cuts, the threat of tax increases on investment cause people to disinvest, exacerbating the “perfect storm”. At least one cause of the current panic can be removed. The government can refrain from saving the speculators. It can extend unemployment benefits. I’m not sure if that makes me a Dem or a Repub. Thanks for the invite, truly, but I think I’ll just remain a card-carrying “nothing”.
 
Hi everyone–it’s me Whatevergirl:wave: --my husband wanted me to post this for him using his username, since he cannot access the forum very often at work.

He was curious of the opinions of his question–will an economic stimulus package help to revive our economy in the event we have a recession? (which looks pretty evident that we might soon)
If you were the President–what measures would you take to build this package?


He said that the Democrats are talking about this as a strong option–but, he is curious as to what ‘his’ republican friends think about it. He will be back later tonight to chat about it.

He looks forward to your replies.🙂
I guess it depends on if you two believe economic growth comes from the government?

I would ask you to consider historically people were conservative so easy money benefited the chance taker. However today credit abuse is a huge issue so maybe historical stimulus is exactly the wrong thing to do?
 
It is either decreased spending somewhere else; increased debt; or printing money.
Basically it works like this: In my local government, if it has an extra dollar, it starts to burn a hole in its pocket. If its not spent, it comes out of its budget, and whoa for that to happen. I wonder why the county school here wants to tear down a perfectly good structure and build a new one.
If taxes are cut which aircraft carrier should be beached; which national park should be sold for development; whose grandmother shouldn’t get her SS check?
Actually there is quite a bit of federally owned land that could definitely be sold off. Grandma’s SS check should reflect what happens to everyone elses checks during a recession.
So now there’s a frantic search to find some way to spend the money without a contract. Which explains why so many government departments have a thousand year supply of toilet paper, closets full of obsolete computers still in their unopened boxes, and why there are so many gazebos around public buildings.
They can’t have that money keep burning a hole in their pocket, lest they have to buy a new tuxedo.
 
Unless it’s gluttony.😛
Agreed but that can be from anyone. It’s not limited to the middle class, upper class, or lower class. Anyway, we’re discussing an economic stimulus package. I say keep the tax cuts in place without reducing them any further. Spend what is necessary to prime the pump short term and thing swill eventually correct themselves. Balanced budget amendment would do more harm than good. I’ve seen that in PA. Every year they leave themselves with no option but to raise taxes or cut spending and sometimes you really can’t do either. They shot themselves in the foot in Harrisburg.
 
Agreed but that can be from anyone. It’s not limited to the middle class, upper class, or lower class. Anyway, we’re discussing an economic stimulus package. I say keep the tax cuts in place without reducing them any further. Spend what is necessary to prime the pump short term and thing swill eventually correct themselves. Balanced budget amendment would do more harm than good. I’ve seen that in PA. Every year they leave themselves with no option but to raise taxes or cut spending and sometimes you really can’t do either. They shot themselves in the foot in Harrisburg.
Agreed. Gluttony is gluttony no matter what class. However, the middle class were the ones taking BILLIONS and BILLIONS out of the ‘ATM Homes’ to finance what? Vacations, SUV’s, plastic surgery and the like. Greed is very much to blame for all our troubles today!

BTW, I heard this morning on NPR that they are throwing around a number of an $800 ‘refund’ so we can all go out and spend it on a new DVD player, washer, TV so we can keep China rolling!

Hopefully we all do ourselves a favor and save it!
 
Agreed. Gluttony is gluttony no matter what class. However, the middle class were the ones taking BILLIONS and BILLIONS out of the ‘ATM Homes’ to finance what? Vacations, SUV’s, plastic surgery and the like. Greed is very much to blame for all our troubles today!

BTW, I heard this morning on NPR that they are throwing around a number of an $800 ‘refund’ so we can all go out and spend it on a new DVD player, washer, TV so we can keep China rolling!

Hopefully we all do ourselves a favor and save it!
And you are making a generalization that all the middle class did this. They did not some did, some did not. No matter how wealthy you get, it is still possible to live beyond your means. And there is nothing wrong per se with buyin a tv, dvd player, or washer. Doesn’t mean you are greedy.
 
And you are making a generalization that all the middle class did this. They did not some did, some did not. No matter how wealthy you get, it is still possible to live beyond your means.
Well since I can’t give you the name of every middle class American who used their home as an ATM then yes, I’m generalizing:p

Of course some were responsible, but many were not. Ther poor don’t have homes to take money out of so you can’t blame them:D
And there is nothing wrong per se with buyin a tv, dvd player, or washer. Doesn’t mean you are greedy.
Yes, if you really need it and don’t just go out and buy for buyings sake. The problem with Americans in general is a lack of disclipline to save.
 
I used to be a Democrat, but I’m not a Republican either.
IMO at this point there is no difference
…………… Seems there is a combination of governmental policies that warp investment decisions, combined with easy monetary policies and unwise governmental fiscal decisions, all of which bump up against economic realities at some point. We have a really insane tax situation which, on one hand, encouraged investment through reductions in the capital gains and dividend taxes, but then held the “sword of Damocles” over it by making it temporary……
?? The issue is social engineering which advantages some over others. When the government decided what qualify as depreciation assets it picks its groups
………………………To ensure eventual recession, Greenspan pumped up the money supply and reduced interest rates, and for what? Because he was afraid of deflation? That’s what he said. But all the while, the only prices that were going down were the prices of ever-increasing cheap imported goods. And people couldn’t spend enough on consumer goods, and China couldn’t build factories fast enough to supply the stuff, or to burn oil fast enough to produce it. Cheap toys went down, but oil didn’t. Commodities started climbing…….
Deflation is not inherently bad however if population is raising and all current loans are based on inflation then a troubled formula would exist under a short deflation period, so I think Greenspan did the right thing
Because of the increases in the money supply, lenders found themselves awash in funds; funds they had to loan out. I remember, not long ago, that banks, brokerages and mortgage companies were in a bind because they had so much money they had trouble loaning it out.
So, giving the whole thing a wink and a nod, they all started being incautious in their lending practices. Watching it happen, and being an old guy who had seen it before, I KNEW the piper would come around for payment. I saw lenders approving 45% payment to income ratios (thats gross income, mind you) and refinances that were 20% or more over last year’s appraisal. Crazy stuff. And people saw those low interest rates and just couldn’t borrow enough money, yes, to pay off credit cards that soon refilled, to buy cars, to buy boats, to make a down payment on a vacation home, to play games “flipping” real estate, to pretend to be “day traders”. Craziness.
yes but day trading and insane house prices come from inflation. Deflation and inflation actually always exist (maybe 90% of items inflation while 10% deflate) the issue was a run of extremes with houses, stocks, medicine extreme inflating while clothes, wages, other things deflated. Now housing, stocks are trying to adjust, but medicine is not a free market
And, while it was all happening, the Congress larded up the budget, yes, on credit. And everybody pretended there was no piper.
Exactly ! And now the money markets are based completely on financing the US government debt. So the financial market is at risk of losing free market status
I remember the early 1980s, and I remember how painful that recession was, for me as well as others. I remember how easy it was to resent Reagan and Paul Volker, and I did. But after it was all over, and uncountable dollars in bogus wealth disappeared, a person could go on, and assets formed a base that had more to do with their productive value than their speculative value. And the economy recovered and, the government came close to a surplus until the fed and the Congress went wild again. And, in truth, if anyone could claim credit for it, it would be Ronald Reagan and Paul Volker, and nobody else.
I never agreed with Volker’s action and it was Carter who took the blame for Volker’s action. However to be fair Volker had to make the decision when no one really knew the correct answer
 
In passing, I might mention that almost nobody seems to notice that they DID reduce social security benefits, and the Dem Congress went along with it. It’s almost a state secret. Nobody talks about it.

I hate to say it, but I guess I would favor extending unemployment benefits, making the tax cuts permanent and letting the economy disinflate itself, even though it’s going to take a big bite out of my own “paper wealth”. It’s just a question of whether it happens fast or slow; whether the pain is seemingly endless, or short and sharp. Giving me an extra $500 or whatever to go blow on Chinese imports is of no value at all. Bringing interest rates down will not tempt me to borrow more, and right now, I shouldn’t borrow more.
exactly, extending unemployment is correct as an emergency task to do the right thing but is never a long term solution. Tax cuts require spending cuts you cannot tax at 30% and spend at 40% endlessly. That is why today’s Republications are liberals in sheep’s clothes. Interest rates take up to 18 months to filter into the economy. About the same for tax cuts.
……….And while the pain of restructuring goes on, those who want to punish the rich can take comfort in the fact that the rich take big hits in recessions too. And those who want to increase government spending for anything but unemployment benefits need to be shamed in public for it. The piper’s here with his hand out, and the pretending needs to stop.
And to those who want to say I’m cruel, let me say again that I’m going to share in the pain. Already am. But none of the halfway measures, or the recriminations or the political posturings are going to do any good at all. We’re in for a rough time, and the only question is how prolonged it’s going to be.
The trickle down theory certainly benefits the rich and is slow to enact. The unemployment benefit is strictly a short term cash infusion which has to use borrowed funds. Additionally, unemployment is a form of government spending (Physical Policy). It is a lot like the 1980’s in that the right thing to do is reduce the government spending which creates short term pain. That is what Volker did* during Jimmy Carter’s era he added short term pain to a painfully situation, but it did reset the market allowing a long growth period from ~1985-2000(minus the 1991 oil shock)
  • Volker raised interest rates until the economy crashed (~'79)because he was convinced a crash was unavoidable so a small crash early instead of a huge crash later. Volker had no control of Physical Policy nor does Bernanke however Bush can control Physical Policy
 
IMO at this point there is no difference ?? ** There is less difference than is represented, certainly recently. In general, however, the Dems at least pay lip service to income transfers as the foremost social good, and the Repubs at least pay lip service to asset acquisition, presumably widespread, as the foremost social good. If both read “Rerum Novarum” and adopted it, we would have some of both, not a mockery of either.** Deflation is not inherently bad But was Greenspan even faced with REAL across-the-board deflation? Never did it seem to me that he was. Certainly, certain prices were coming down. But others were going up. The money supply was not contracting, a la the 1930s, but growing. So he inflated the money supply artificially, instead of simply accommodating economic growth. Now, as is the case with these contractions, the “bogus wealth” is going to be squeezed out of the economy. Trillions are already squeezed out. Unfortunately, those who based their decisions on its continued existence are in for a rough time. That pretty much includes all of us. A lot of us had no choices. Anyone who wanted a home in the last few years paid a price that’s probably greater than its value now. But what choice did they have, other than to believe in, and wait for, a down cycle that all the experts and authorities tried to convince them would not occur. It wasn’t all just buying big screen tvs and vacationing in Cancun. What were the people with their 401K plans going to do to avoid the contraction they are now experiencing? Buy gold? And how would people have known to do that or when to do it? I’m reasonably confident that anybody buying gold now is going to regret it later, notwithstanding all the claim of “gold at $2,000” and so forth. Were all the hard working people out there supposed to turn into speculators, all of whom expect to “get in at the bottom” and “jump out at the top”? Halfway measures by government keep the deceptions in place, and only cause more harm. One way or another, this economy is disinflating, and is going to keep doing it for awhile, and all these measures aimed at increasing consumer spending temporarily will cost money but come to naught. Those on the REAL bottom, like the unemployed, are the ones who need protection, and those higher up on the scale are going to have to take their lumps for awhile.
 
IMO at this point there is no difference ?? There is less difference than is represented, certainly recently. In general, however, the Dems at least pay lip service to income transfers as the foremost social good, and the Repubs at least pay lip service to asset acquisition, presumably widespread, as the foremost social good.
That is a big problem see government ONLY EXIST TO DO TRANSFERS! Whether the transfer should be limited to taxes for military or taxes for welfare it is still a transfer
Deflation is not inherently bad But was Greenspan even faced with REAL across-the-board deflation? Never did it seem to me that he was. Certainly, certain prices were coming down. But others were going up.
Greenspans objective was to head off actual deflation which would be defined as more mass deflation than mass inflation
The money supply was not contracting, a la the 1930s, but growing. So he inflated the money supply artificially, instead of simply accommodating economic growth.
exactly during the ’30’s the tight money was a mistake and made things worse
Now, as is the case with these contractions, the “bogus wealth” is going to be squeezed out of the economy. Trillions are already squeezed out. Unfortunately, those who based their decisions on its continued existence are in for a rough time. That pretty much includes all of us. A lot of us had no choices. Anyone who wanted a home in the last few years paid a price that’s probably greater than its value now. But what choice did they have, other than to believe in, and wait for, a down cycle that all the experts and authorities tried to convince them would not occur. It wasn’t all just buying big screen tvs and vacationing in Cancun.
exactly the bogus wealth is in the extreme inflation items as houses, and stocks. The deflation sections as clothes and toys were breaking American producers in those industries
………. Halfway measures by government keep the deceptions in place, and only cause more harm. One way or another, this economy is disinflating, and is going to keep doing it for awhile, and all these measures aimed at increasing consumer spending temporarily will cost money but come to naught.
The economy is slowing not deflating. We have less economic activity as less buying and borrowing. Deflating means you can buy more with $10 today than you could last week.
Those on the REAL bottom, like the unemployed, are the ones who need protection, and those higher up on the scale are going to have to take their lumps for awhile.
classic Keynesian economics? The government borrows and spends until the private sector cleans up its past over buying then returns to normal levels. However there are problems as 1)getting government to stop over spending after the recession, 2)the financial market having to deal with the government debt, 3) the modern economy is so diverse what should the Government buy? Or who should they appoint as the cash receiver? (unemployed, welfare people, tax payers, or capital gains filers)
 
The economy is slowing not deflating. We have less economic activity as less buying and borrowing. Deflating means you can buy more with $10 today than you could last week. ** And that’s certainly going on in some sectors right now; most notably real estate, some debt instruments and equities. They are the “canary in the mine”. If, as seems inevitable, we have/are in a recession, you’ll also see oil and other commodities come down in time. It’s still early. Because of pervasive “just in time” manufacturing, it’s less dramatic in manufactured goods. Surpluses of manufactured goods are not large. Idle capacity simply grows. In agriculture, “high end” prices drop more than low value/unit basic staple prices, and we’re already seeing that in the “front end of the pipeline” in the cattle market. Pretty dramatically, too. It takes awhile for all the effects of wealth destruction to filter through. Medical costs are not likely to change because few of the end users actually pay for the goods and services, or perceive that they do.** classic Keynesian economics? Nope, classic “been there” economics. the modern economy is so diverse what should the Government buy? Or who should they appoint as the cash receiver? (unemployed, welfare people, tax payers, or capital gains filers) The government shouldn’t be buying anything or paying anybody as a measure of economic policy. It should extend unemployment benefits out of simple human decency.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top