Monday, October 26, 2009

BS

So brother Rich(ie) sends me a book. It talks about economic policy. The first several pages wax and wanes about manipulating the economy, never once mentioning....spending. The book rants about how if we could just figure out if the economy was deflating or inflating the government could manipulate things...just right.
Not once in the first several pages was spending discussed and subsequently mostly as a footnote.
My dear soul mate, Mark, how a human mind can honestly believe that a government can properly and favorably manipulate a complex economy is beyond me.
We, my liberal friends, are going broke. We do not need health care reform, we need entitlement reform and we need to start by not adding any more (health care, immigrant care, welfare expansion).
And we need less taxes! More money just staying in the private sector, creating jobs. Not "directed" tax cuts, made up by some silly fool in Washington.
The "O" was handed a tough situation but he is using it as an excuse to create socialism not repair the economy.
What is wrong with people keeping their own money ?
More to come.

2 comments:

Baxter said...

Jimmy -

Your comments speak poorly of your thinking. Perhaps you were up late reading the book and didn't get enough rest?

Fact: If GWB had merely maintained Clinton's 20%/GDP receipts, he would have had a net surplus over his eight years rather than doubling the national debt. That's right - even with the GOP spending orgy, we'd have had a surplus. How does that square with your "BS" comments?

Your comments also suggest that we should have a constant, one-size-fits-all fiscal and monetary policy. Should our tax policy be formed regardless of conditions? Would a budget in a deep recession be the same as that during a boom? Really?

How come the western world has prospered so well in the post-war era using the Keynesian model? Why would we want a pre-Keynes classic model, filled with booms and busts and Latin American style wealth disparity? Despite our current woes, the past 60 years have been far more economically prosperous and stable than any other 60-year stretch.

Baxter said...

Still waiting for answers... I even gave you a book to read. Its an open book test!