CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6859

Harmor wrote:

Can anyone agree with me on this point:  If the government were to say tomorrow that they are lowering taxes wouldn't that immediately increase the likelyhood someone will feel better about their economic outlook and start spending?  If we have those Stimulus Checks as an example people were spending them before they had them.  For two months we had pretty good numbers...now how to sustain that without having the government send $600 stimulus checks every other month?
The stimulus checks were a patent dollar-diluting waste of time. Increasing your budget deficit by cutting taxes will further devalue the dollar. In an economy so heavily reliant on imports and whose elite are so deeply entrenched in the economies of developing nations that's probably not wise. It may prompt further flight of capital to more bang-for-buck nations. One would have to simultaneously majorly reduce public spending, which in a country with major SS and medicare problems is also probably not viable (not to mention the fact that decreased public spending will also be a deflationary downward pressure on the domestic economy).

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-12-25 04:26:06)

Onidax
Member
+41|6797

Turquoise wrote:

I agree with this guy partially, but he seems to ignore the fact that the government invests in a lot of research both for medicine and for things like NASA.  You could also use money used for military research as an example of government stimulus of the economy.
I don't really get what your point is. What does the government investing in medicine or NASA have to do with anything?

Turquoise wrote:

Keynesian economics isn't completely wrong
Really? Their basic model of borrowing to stimulate couldn't be any more crazy. America along with a few other 'economic powerhouses' are heading further down sh*t creek due to debt based consumption. Eventually someone has to pay the bill.

Last edited by Onidax (2008-12-25 17:23:52)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

Onidax wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I agree with this guy partially, but he seems to ignore the fact that the government invests in a lot of research both for medicine and for things like NASA.  You could also use money used for military research as an example of government stimulus of the economy.
I don't really get what your point is. What does the government investing in medicine or NASA have to do with anything?
The central argument being made is that the government spending tax money for its own purposes is bad and that the private sector should completely determine how stimulated the economy is.

Yet, in the examples I provided, it shows that the government collecting tax money and specifically aiming it at certain sectors greatly benefits society in many cases.

Onidax wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Keynesian economics isn't completely wrong
Really? Their basic model of borrowing to stimulate couldn't be any more crazy. America along with a few other 'economic powerhouses' are heading further down sh*t creek due to debt based consumption. Eventually someone has to pay the bill.
That's not purely the result of Keynesian economics though.  There are multiple ideologies at fault there.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard