Posted by bad_luck on 3/4/2013 9:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 3/4/2013 9:14:00 AM (view original):
Oh, that's right. 

You were enlightening me how wasteful government spending was a good thing.

Carry on.

Sure. If the alternative is no spending at all, government spending, even if it's wasteful, is better for the economy.

That doesn't mean that the government shouldn't try to spend the money in good ways or that we wouldn't spend it better.

Does this also hold true for private citizens?

I'm thinking that maybe I need a new wrench for my toolbox, but I'm not sure.  I can either (a) not buy one, (b) go to Home Depot and buy one for $4.95, or (c) go to the family owned hardware store in town and buy one for $87.50.

Which is best for the economy?

I'm thinking you're the one not keeping up. Unless you're making the argument that over $1.2 trillion in government spending is waste.

Posted by tecwrg on 3/4/2013 9:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 3/4/2013 9:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 3/4/2013 9:14:00 AM (view original):
Oh, that's right. 

You were enlightening me how wasteful government spending was a good thing.

Carry on.

Sure. If the alternative is no spending at all, government spending, even if it's wasteful, is better for the economy.

That doesn't mean that the government shouldn't try to spend the money in good ways or that we wouldn't spend it better.

Does this also hold true for private citizens?

I'm thinking that maybe I need a new wrench for my toolbox, but I'm not sure.  I can either (a) not buy one, (b) go to Home Depot and buy one for $4.95, or (c) go to the family owned hardware store in town and buy one for $87.50.

Which is best for the economy?

It does, but people act rationally, so they don't do that. Same with businesses, they don't hire employees when demand is depressed because they're rational. It's a downward spiral that requires a non rational actor (with access to hundreds of billions of dollars) to escape.

So now you're arguing that a non-rational government is good for the economy?

I'm arguing that private citizens, acting rationally, make depressed demand worse. In order to escape that downward spiral, the economy needs someone willing to spend a ton of money.

I think he is.  Individuals and businesses should spend rationally.    Not so much with our government.

Do I have it right, badluck?

Read my post above. Then explain how the government selling more treasuries would eliminate the deficit.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/4/2013 10:07:00 AM (view original):
I'm arguing that private citizens, acting rationally, make depressed demand worse. In order to escape that downward spiral, the economy needs someone willing to spend a ton of money.

So it's a good thing that our government steps in and buys a $4 hammer for $100?  Couldn't they accomplish the same thing by buying 25 hammers, when they only need 1, for $4?

In fact, wouldn't that be better because they'd need storage space, at a cost, to store all the stuff they don't need?

Yes, that would be better.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/4/2013 10:07:00 AM (view original):
I'm arguing that private citizens, acting rationally, make depressed demand worse. In order to escape that downward spiral, the economy needs someone willing to spend a ton of money.

Is an ecomony that is built upon a foundation of artificial demand self-sustainable?

Nope. At some point private growth has to take over.

Damn, I should have included "all of the above".

Please explain how we could eliminate the deficit by selling more treasuries.

Aw, cmon.  Don't turtle-up now.   We're dying to hear how wasteful spending is the way to recovery and I, personally, want to know which of the above would solve the most problems and why our current administration hasn't taken that route.