Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (25660)	2/4/2008 4:06:29 PM
From: Jim S	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Tim, it seems to me that something that's being overlooked in this discussion is the purpose of the deficit spending. For example, a war that threatens the existence of a nation would be worth some deficit spending, even if it drags on for a long time. Or, deficit spending for infrastructure, which will return an economic gain could be worth borrowing for, even over a very long term, so long as the return exceeds the expense. OTOH, spending on things that have no real value to an economy or a nation's existence, such as transfer payments, has an overall negative impact, both short and long term. Essentially, we're talking about borrowing for investment versus expense.

To: TimF who wrote (25660)	2/4/2008 4:10:13 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "Endless large deficits are a problem, and a negative thing," That is CORRECT. Like I pointed out: not even the MOST LIBERAL of Keynesians would argue in favor of endless government deficit spending across all phases of the business cycle, and without end. That is such a LIBERAL and PRO-BIG GOVERNMENT policy that I can scarcely think,of anything that would be more so. Re: "... but one that can be dealt with." ANYTHING can be 'dealt with'. Disasters of all sorts can be 'dealt with'... but that does not mean they should be welcomed or invited. Re: "We are worse off because of them, but its not a disaster." Oh, it's a DISASTER alright... (albeit a very long-lived and slowly building one. One look at the Weimar Republic might serve to illustrate the point.)