22 August 2008

response to obama's keynesianism

There is some level of crowding to factor in there, but in general so long as the projects are public works (which wouldn't be built by private enterprise) this is a fine premise. Public basics like infrastructure or basic scientific research tend to have extensive positive benefits which pay out over time well. That isn't generally what government has been spending money on or at least, it isn't the portion of spending which is aggravating. Plus to me it isn't enough to simply spend money on say education. As a sports analogy, throwing money around will only get you a lot of overpaid athletes and not necessarily the best team.

The critical issue, the bone I pick with this principle of Keynesian economics is that there are few politicians willing to reign in spending during boom economies and haul in surpluses for when we might need government injections. The money continues to be spent. The alternative is to play havoc with the tax code every few years as the economy cycles. Clinton/Gingrich budgeting was a hopeful sign, but not one which seems to have resonated with anyone now in power. Anyone can say they want to pay down their debts, it is rather like the first step in addiction treatment. I'd like to see them doing something to stop the problem as well.

The usual argument that the general public could spend the money better or more efficiently than the government isn't panning out anymore (much to my chagrin). Neither spends money all that well in the present system. The fact that government officials often "waste" tax monies shouldn't surprise us.

No comments: