Well, again that seems simplistic to me. Keynes said you could just bury money in the ground and let people dig it up, and it'd have a stimulative effect, and I'm sure that's true. But I do think it makes a difference what you spend money on. The government should spend money on things like infrastructure that improve private sector productivity when the economy turns around.
That is pretty much Keynes' point. Digging up money in jars (an analogy to mining gold for money - a similarly pointless exercise) would be better than nothing because it would create a stimulatory result, but a much smarter use of that same labour would be to do something useful like, say, building houses.
What's bizzare is watching all these economists try to come up with theories about why wages aren't going up during full employment. A few are finally saying "Unions are dead so workers have no bargaining power" but _very_ few.
Well, if there really was full employment, the lack of unions wouldn't be particularly important.
The real reason is because the economy isn't anywhere close to full employment.
LOL.
Boring propaganda is boring.
âoeInvestmentsâ come out of revenue before it is taxed. You donâ(TM)t get taxed âoeinvestingâ in your business.
The problem is, most every country other than the US recognizes that receiving tax revenue is a good thing, and having people invest in factories, fabs, etc is good for your country. As Barak Obama said "if you want people to do less of something, tax it". The US taxes investment. They have high taxes on factories, fabs, development centers - companies - because apparently they want people to do less building of companies in the US. Other countries aren't so stupid. They WANT companies like Dell, Google, and Apple to put their operations in their countries, so they don't tax the hell of that like the US does.
Aren't taxes on profits ?
"Help Mr. Wizard!" -- Tennessee Tuxedo