I like much of what Ron Paul says, but I don't think he has some magic pill. Public or private sector jobs? Did he go into more detail?
did I not address infrastructure spending.. oh that's right I did, but you choose to cut off my post. i fully understand the article and your post. It seems what isn't understood is that PUBLIC spending can only be done at a cost to present and future taxpayers. there is no way around it, except to do it as little as possible. The private sector CAN build infrastructure. I don't care at all whether Keynes would approve or not.
some nonsense about lower debt spurring economic activity. ron paul like policies would take us back to a 1937 depression. some day we may have to do austarity and suffer through the depression it would cause but lets not try to claim that cutting a trillion dollars would spur economic activity.
So freethinker...why doesnt the government just give every American $100,000 to spend as he pleases. He will buy lots of things which will boost the economy and create demand for more jobs, right? Would this be a good idea for you?
you are a clueless leftist... to review... a. your author proved innovative supply (use any symbol you wish) created demand --- the complete reverse of his and your thesis. Creation and creative destruction is what makes capitalism work. The economy grows by creating innovative supply and innovative services. b. Our govt is spending 2.43 dollars to create 1 dollar of gdp... by anyone's arithmetic that shows you that govt should not be spending more.
that would no doubt spur economic activity but by investing in public infrastructure you get the benefit of productivity enhancement. dont forget this infrastructure will have to be replaced someday in any case, some if it is already obsolete.
You admitted yourself that the govt doesn't actually create anything they take OUR money and give it to private sector companies to build. The point, there is no need for the govt to be involved at all. On a thread very similar to this not so long ago, I gave you an example of the railroads, the ONLY intercontinental railroad ever built in this country that never went bankrupt was the one produced 100% privately by JJ Hill. The reason why is simple, he HAD to make $$ to stay in business, while the govt subsidized railroads did not. For piezoe to use the high speed rail as an example of something we need and that will pay dividends is laughable.. at least according to other govt run railways. How's amtrak doing? Oh and how about energy alternatives, we DON'T actually need them and these companies like solyndra can't even stay afloat. lol. and how about education, how in the world does investing in education pay dividends? "well students come out smarter and get better jobs, they end up paying more in tax", NOT if the jobs don't exist. Education is not a right, and the fed govt has no authority to be spending money on college loans. not in the Constitution anyway.