tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post3774954293945725356..comments2024-03-28T09:54:55.115-05:00Comments on Dad29: The "What Ifs" of PorkulusDad29http://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12897315.post-41993232805600422872011-08-31T14:04:18.810-05:002011-08-31T14:04:18.810-05:00"....some Americans realize all the massive d..."....some Americans realize all the massive deficit-financed spending of today will ultimately require raising their taxes tomorrow."<br /><br />Again? Really? Pure Ricardian equivalence. Keynesians put this one to bed.<br /><br />"Individuals and families largely saved the transfers and tax rebates. The federal government increased purchases, but by only an immaterial amount. State and local governments used the stimulus grants to reduce their net borrowing (largely by acquiring more financial assets) rather than to increase expenditures, and they shifted expenditures away from purchases toward transfers."<br /><br />Yes. Correct. Thank you. THAT's the problem. ARRA funds were primarily distributed towards supporting state and local government's collapsing balance sheets, ineffecient tax cuts which were mostly saved and UI, food stamps and other automatic stabilizers that were manditory unless we wanted to throw people out on the streets with nothing.<br /><br />AGAIN, ARRA supported demand but did VERY little to boost it. Which is why Keynesians have harped about bigger stimulus focused on the consumer and pulling forward infrastructure projects (at 2.5% interest) that would need to be funded and completed at some point in the future anyway. <br /><br />And the recession of 1921 was not, in any way, the same as 1932 and/or 2008. I don't know Taylor but I'm sure he's a big fan of the Mises people who use '21 to try and convince people that they know what they're talking about even though they've been wrong on everything for the past 3 years. (and I mean everything).J. Struppnoreply@blogger.com