|
|
|
|
|
|
by mas3god
2096 days ago
|
|
|
This is a faliure of Keynesian economics. The moment the government had the privilege to spend beyond its means was the moment it ditched savings and high interest rates. Now that were actually in a crisis it caused us to have even less savings and more debt than without a federal reserve. |
|
|
- trillion dollar wars, and in general, multi-trillion dollar military expenditure
- subsidized private health insurance (as opposed to a more streamlined/wholesale universal healthcare plan)
- social security fund that leaks value over time
- massively bailed out banks
- widespread quantitative easing
In my humble and probably misguided understanding of Keynesian economics, you would want the government to fund e.g. a federal jobs guarantee during a recession.
Like, if you had a recession, pay one set of people to dig a hole, and another set of people to fill it up again, because then at least money would still propagate throughout the economy.
But I'm not certain that these huge expenditures (above) really did much to help worker or city solvency. Basically unless you are one of the government's top clients, don't expect it to pick up a check pad.
I guess I can sort of see how you're saying that it may have been Keynesian-esque for all these various industries but it's certainly not that Keynesian for the little guy.