Posted on 06/21/2013 5:51:59 PM PDT by neverdem
Here's the link.
Sure, there are some hangers on and family members who gather at the back door to collect their share...but the economic impact of such spending is wasted.
It does not reward productive enterprise or brilliance...it rewards those who believe in the system of graft and nepotism.
Yes, of course the money will eventually find its way back into the system...but only after it has been squandered. Only have such wealth has rewarded drugs, sloth and revolution will it make its way back into the realm of respectable capital.
Martin Hamilton 1 day ago
‘If the government takes a dollar from A in taxes to give to B, even Keynesians can understand that it’s a wash in terms of aggregate demand.”
This statement couldn't be more wrong. In a depressed economy, consumers don't spend so businesses don't invest. There is no wash in aggregate demand because consumers and businesses sit on what cash they have and DO NOT spend. There is therefore a lack of demand, and that's why there is a persistint economic slump. The private sector does not give to A, B, C, D, or anyone. That is why today corporations are sitting on record piles of cash they don't know what to do with.
Government spending doesn't replace private spending WHEN PRIVATE SPENDING ISNT OCURRING or is greatly depressed. That is in part the definition of a depression.
The author admits as much, when she says that Milton Friedman acknowledged (and she seems to agree) that the great depression was a case when government spending was justified. What she fails to realize is that today's economic conditions are very similar to the great depression casue, especially in Europe.
It also matters on what the spending is done for. Spending that improves infrastructure has a pay back in that it promotes business and the economy. Spending that bloats government with do nothing jobs or worse increased regulation is horribly inefficient. It would be better simply to write welfare checks.
The current administration is not to be trusted with another stimulus.
Even the parts of the stimulus that could have helped our economy often went to foreign firms because we don't protect our markets even when we are spending taxpayer money to try to stimulate our economy.
At the time Obama signed the Stimulus act the cumulative costs of war in Iraq and Afghanistan was roughly $1 trillion. When Democrat acquaintances bring up the costs of the war I ask them which produced more jobs—the Stimulus or the war?
What is needed is a buy-American move.
We have two parties right now. One is anti-American in that it taxes and punishes anyone in America who works.
The problem is the other part is anti-American, in that is sends their jobs to other countries.
BOTH PARTIES are anti-American in business.
We need American jobs now.
The private sector does not give to A, B, C, D, or anyone.
[They do when they see a wise decision. Spending for spending sake is not wise.]
The opportunities to make a wise decision are always there even in the worst economy.
I didn’t necessarily agree with the commenter but thought his view was worth posting.
The genie is out of the bottle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.