US Congressional Budget Office annual report projects continued economic growth, but federal deficits and debts reaching levels not seen since just after World War II
I wonder who will be left with the hot potato that is an economy artificially heated by deficit spending during one the longest bull market in history.
I wonder who will be left with the hot potato that is an economy artificially heated by deficit spending during one the longest bull market in history.
Knowing the way things have gone, it'll be a Democratic president and then when they inevitably lose the next election we'll be even more fucked than we already are. But then there's a very real...
Knowing the way things have gone, it'll be a Democratic president and then when they inevitably lose the next election we'll be even more fucked than we already are. But then there's a very real possibility that Trump is re-elected, probably with the help of some cheating, and maybe he gets stuck with it.
I'm not sure how you draw the line between natural and "artificial" spending? Seems to me that it's all spending. The question is whether it will stop. If some of the unicorns crash it will be...
I'm not sure how you draw the line between natural and "artificial" spending? Seems to me that it's all spending. The question is whether it will stop.
If some of the unicorns crash it will be private investors taking the fall. See WeWork and SoftBank.
There are reports that the Fed is buying a lot of government debt.
Keynesian policy would dictate that the government should spend more when the economy is bad, and less when it is doing well. I would argue the subsidies to farmers, for example, constitutes...
Keynesian policy would dictate that the government should spend more when the economy is bad, and less when it is doing well. I would argue the subsidies to farmers, for example, constitutes "artificial" spending.
I largely agree. But I could see wanting to keep some farmers in business for strategic reasons. It doesn't seem like subsidies are necessarily bad if it's part of a plan?
I largely agree. But I could see wanting to keep some farmers in business for strategic reasons. It doesn't seem like subsidies are necessarily bad if it's part of a plan?
I wonder who will be left with the hot potato that is an economy artificially heated by deficit spending during one the longest bull market in history.
Knowing the way things have gone, it'll be a Democratic president and then when they inevitably lose the next election we'll be even more fucked than we already are. But then there's a very real possibility that Trump is re-elected, probably with the help of some cheating, and maybe he gets stuck with it.
I'm not sure how you draw the line between natural and "artificial" spending? Seems to me that it's all spending. The question is whether it will stop.
If some of the unicorns crash it will be private investors taking the fall. See WeWork and SoftBank.
There are reports that the Fed is buying a lot of government debt.
Keynesian policy would dictate that the government should spend more when the economy is bad, and less when it is doing well. I would argue the subsidies to farmers, for example, constitutes "artificial" spending.
I largely agree. But I could see wanting to keep some farmers in business for strategic reasons. It doesn't seem like subsidies are necessarily bad if it's part of a plan?
Yeah, if your concerns are ensuring there is enough food for people it might make sense.
What reasons? I'm not really knowledgeable on agriculture past 'if we grow meat on labs, we can destroy it'.
Oh ok. So as a emergency supply? That makes sense, although growing meat on labs still seems better and more spatially efficient.