|
|
|
|
|
by dntrkv
1494 days ago
|
|
And there were a ton of voices saying the exact opposite. That we must do everything we can to avoid another 2008. There will always be the voices on both sides, the problem is that it's not always easy to know who to listen to at the time. > The feel good policy of spending excessively and avoiding inflation fighting has proven to fail many times in history There are many examples of the opposite. The question isn't whether we spend or not, it's how much. That's the difficult part to get, especially in a democracy (doubly so in the US political system where you try to get as much done in the half a year that you can actually govern). |
|
This was Larry Summers' argument, backed with real numbers. Nobody passing these bills ever considered whether it was too much. You have the two top economists for both Clinton and Obama saying it was too much and being outspoken about the issues with how the bill was constructed. I don't know where current politicians lost all economic sense along the way, but it was the zeitgeist of the moment to spend as recklessly as possible
All they had to do was replace lost income for unemployed, and leave pretty much everything else untouched and things would have been fine. No need for debt forbearance, because you've supported income for those who lost their jobs. But needs to be structured such that incentive to return to work.
Now most of the impact of the stimulus will be destroyed by inflation