|
Ok folks I can't believe this needs to be 'splained but so be it... fiscal conservatives still think that a check in hand will do the trick... after all it worked so well over the last eight years
So excuse the REALLY BASIC explanation but it is needed
Lets assume for the moment I am the government. I am facing an economic crisis
My two choices are two let the free market go on in its own merry way... and perhaps put into the hands of individuals a certain ammount of money
The other is to fund infrastructure, aka the building of stuff, as well as industry
Now choice one, which we have tried now TWICE means that INDIVIDUALS best case will spend some of those funds in stuff... essentially giving a small boost to the economy (What happened the last time, lasted three months) because once that money is gone, it is gone... worst case people will just save the damn thing... IN reality a combo of this happened last time around, but the stimulus to the economy lasted, best case a quarter
Now the other choice.
I allocate money to build your local school. That creates jobs in construction, and people will build that school. After that, we need teachers, and custodians and all the support structure that goes on to keeping that school going. Medium to long term the students graduate and start paying taxes as well
Now multiply that school by the hundreds of thousands of projects that will receive moneys, ranging from your local fire department that gets a new station, that needs new trucks and crews, all the way to your local university, or as in the case of the great depression a factory that hires people.
See how the cascading effect is multiplied (There I go using the actual terms)
So here is your choice
One quarter stimulus, or years. What would you choose?
Oh and yes, this is the difference between pretty conservative, free market, modern economics and what John Maynard Keynes pushed for, leading to the New Deal
|