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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (191797)	6/18/2012 10:54:13 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543798

<<<< Keynes would have kept the Clinton tax policies in place and continued paying down the debt. >>>> That's where you are wrong. First economic danger was Y2K, followed soon by 9-11. The government did keynes like stimuluses for both. Then there was the first Bush recession. Remember Krugman arguing in 2002 - 2003 that we needed a housing boom to stimulate the economy? ..........ALSO, if you remember we fought two wars during all this time and that is exactly a keynesian type stimulus. Sooooo it is hard to argue that at least through say 2004 that there was any option under Keynesian thinking to increase taxes. BUT in a way we did increase taxes because of the housing explosion. ESPECIALLY State and local coffers became flush with extra spending cash. AND that then led to overexpansion of local and State governments. The states for the most part didn't save as they had no incentive to so they just grew and became way bigger than normal times could possibly allow.