One has a choice..... "Cure" the cancer.... Or just "let it fester".... The patient has "economic cancer"....
Ouch. This definitely sounds like gov. education. When you took the money to build the bridge, you also took the money from the guy who was going to buy the pair of shoes. Which in turn took the money out of the cobbler's pocket, and so on. -burn8
yes but the shoe guy gets to use the bridge saving him a 2 day trip the old route to get his grain to market.
We evolve. If I were to spend $400 on shoes this year (on 4 pairs) transporting by foot, but now only need 1 pair at $100 since I also spent $20K on a car, how does $20100 in economic activity equate the same as $400?
But what about the fact that this guy's two days of time are worth significantly less than what he spends on shoes ?
So now since the cobbler has no job he can go for a walk out to the edge of Sarah Palin's bridge to nowhere. -burn8
In my county they're building a building that our local investigative news uncovered has a $9,000. leather sofa for the superintendents office. It'll take alot for all the rocks to get turned over. Wait till infrastructure billions get delegated to the states. The streets are going to run green from the kickbacks slippage.
I guess if the money doesn't need to be paid back then we can spend away. Who cares? In fact, why stop at 1 trillion? Hell, lets start thinking about the future. Don't most interstates need to be widened? If deficit spending is so great why limit it at all?
The problem with using more debt to fight a debt-caused problem, is: eventually foreigners will refuse to buy more treasuries, and if the fed just monetizes treasuries, eventually foreigners will refuse to accept US dollars. When that happens, the US will have to go back to basics and produce stuff that other countries want, and recovery will be slow and painful. This will happen all in its sweet time, but correcting the problem early means less pain down the road.