11-14-2016, 12:14 AM
(11-13-2016, 11:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(11-13-2016, 10:11 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: In the case of borrowing and taxing the state is taking capital that could be put to work elsewhere and using it it for whatever. I will grant that not all spending is equal. A tax cut for the extremely wealthy (and I mean on their take home income, low corporate and capital gains taxes push money into investment and re-investment given a higher personal income tax rate) is a poor way to spend that capital. The same would be true of a tax cut for the poor. Or welfare. Or subsidies for insurance.
Spending that same capital on public infrastructure, either new construction or refurbishing existing infrastructure, while not glamorous has a rate of return much much higher than a mere tax cut or a welfare check.
But even if you don't believe in keynesian deficits, massive government spending on infrastructure is not the way to go.
This is pretty much what happened in the Great Depression. Obozo did much the same thing that Hoover and FDR did and got the same results. Not surprising when you think about it and this is perfectly in line with Hayek's business cycle theory. If Trump is smart he will do what Harding did and I expect that he will get similar results which were a short nasty recession followed by real growth in the economy.
Let people keep and spend their money and the aggregate demand problem, along with some others, will fix themselves.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises