(1) Still no support for the idea that spending is the problem that is causing high unemployment (note that the European countries that have cut spending have exploding unemployment).
You mean other than the persistent high unemployment despite the dramatic increase in government spending? Are you going to continue to ignore that fact?
(2) Who cares? We have persistently high unemployment. That's a really really big problem right now at this very moment. And we can do something about it. But we choose not to.
That is your problem Dung... you can't even recognize the problem. The problem is the vast mismanagement in DC. But you think DC is the solution. They are not. They are the problem.
If I ran the zoo, that's what it would be spent on. And the objection that we shouldn't do what is the right thing to do now (spend more (and which you concede is the right thing to do)) because Congress won't do the right thing later is stupid. More stupid is the idea that we should do the wrong thing now (cut spending) because what we really need is another recession and higher unemployment. I don't get it.
Spending on infrastructure is one thing. But that is not where the money is going Dung. It is going to special interest groups. Just look at the pork in the fiscal cliff deal. That tells you where the problem lies.
It is truly laughable that you say that, because you are the one that screams 'hilarious' when I state that tax cuts work short term so long as you have long term spending cuts to follow. You tell me 'it will never happen' and thus the tax cuts are a bad idea. Now you state the opposite.
I didn't say we should borrow as much as possible. The fact of the matter is that we have to spend lots of money on infrastructure over the next 10 years. In all likelihood, we will have to borrow to pay for a substantial portion of it, whether we borrow now or we borrow later. So it's sensible to borrow now cheaply for spending that will have to occur anyway and which will address the single greatest problem facing the economy - persistent high unemployment.
Yes, again, I agree. The above is truly Keynesian and would work to the benefit of the economy long term. The problem is they are not implementing Keynesian theory. They are continuing to spend on short term stop gap measures. While they were needed in 2009, they are not what we should be doing today. I think we can agree on that point.
Wait. You want to induce a recession through massive spending cuts purportedly because it will reduce the deficit. I just don't see how that's a likely outcome. If the past is any guide, massive spending cuts will cause a recession and more debt, not less. In short, your policy prescription (spending cuts) is not likely to achieve your policy goals (deficit reduction)
Again moron... yes, a recession is likely in the short term. But get your fiscal house in order and you will see the corporate spending and consumer spending start to return.
You are completely incorrect in saying it won't reduce the deficit and eventually debt. Stop outspending your revenues dung... it is a recipe to put us exactly where Europe is today.
So we should cut spending but not cut entitlements?
1) Yes, beginning with the DoD.. at least 30% reductions can be done over the next couple of years.
2) You can cut spending in Medicare without cutting entitlements. Obama declared he found $500B in waste. Start there Dung.
3) Social security can be fixed with a doughnut hole solution. Re-implement a portion of the tax for those making more than say $250k or $500k or whatever the number needs to be to help the solvency issue.
4) Cut everything else back to 2007 levels adjusted for inflation and population.
Do the above and the deficit is gone
Obviously I would go further and simplify the tax code as discussed before.
