The debt "crisis" is not really a crisis, we should spend more. (Congress, interview)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't care what any economist says, approaching $17 trillion in debt is never good. We're at unattainable levels as of now and just about every politican knows this. I can agree you can't make drastic, austerity cuts in effort to balance things but to spend more is ridiculous.
To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble. Judging by Mr. Greenspan's remarkably cheerful recent testimony, he still thinks he can pull that off. But the Fed chairman's crystal ball has been cloudy lately; remember how he urged Congress to cut taxes to head off the risk of excessive budget surpluses? And a sober look at recent data is not encouraging.
Oh, that used up proven false argument. I'm sure you didn't read the whole article where Krugman basically predicted bush was tanking the economy. But here is the follow up to that
"One of the funny aspects of being a somewhat, um, forceful writer is that I’m regularly accused of all sorts of villainy. I was personally responsible for the demise of Enron; my nonexistent son worked for Hillary; etc.. The latest seems to be that I called for the creation of a housing bubble — in fact, the bubble is my fault! The claim seems to be based on this piece.
Guys, read it again. It wasn’t a piece of policy advocacy, it was just economic analysis. What I said was that the only way the Fed could get traction would be if it could inflate a housing bubble. And that’s just what happened."
I don't care what any economist says, approaching $17 trillion in debt is never good. We're at unattainable levels as of now and just about every politican knows this. I can agree you can't make drastic, austerity cuts in effort to balance things but to spend more is ridiculous.
Yes, who cares what an incredibly brilliant Nobel peace prize winner who has devoted their entire life to studying economics has to say about it? I just don't like it. Great logic there.
They've been priniting money and spending it for years,why aren't things improving for john q taxpayer?
Because we didn't spend enough.
And, "things" are improving.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
