But on economics and budgets, history shows us the right wing, supply side/Austrian School/Ayn Rand approach has this far proven to hurt growth, raises deficits and debt, and has otherwise been a failure in every respect.
Right now, there's no such thing as a fiscally responsible fiscal conservative. Reduced growth means larger deficits and larger debt down the road.
Also, we've never fully adopted Keynesianism, or else we wouldn't have any evidence since that a more conservative approach is so bad, would we?
So what is it that really raises deficits and debt? It's not a conservative supply side approach by itself. It's the back-and-forth manner in which we respond to what's going on in the economy. As a rule, we favor capitalism in an expansion and socialism in a contraction. In other words, Keynesianism would work better in theory if we actually followed the protocol and cut back during good periods. But we don't.
Today's Keynesian meme is circular reasoning. It leads to perpetually using increasing spending to maximize growth and saying that only by maximizing growth will deficits and debt be reduced.Right now, there's no such thing as a fiscally responsible fiscal conservative. Reduced growth means larger deficits and larger debt down the road.
I can go along with Keynesianism checking out as effective in theory, but in practice federal spenders can always find an excuse to keep spending more and more. It's never ending.
Last edited by Neomalthusian; 27th December 2013 at 11:31 AM.
If there is such evidence of conservative economics replete with failure, then clearly we have not adopted a fully conservative approach nor a Keynesian one. We have an ambivalent approach. That flip-flopping economic policy approach is the most costly, and what really grows deficits and debt. Not just one side, but the two in tandem.
When I go to the pub to party....sometimes considering which cutie I most want to spend time with...is an easy choice...sometimes a bit tricky...but what will not work is fixating on some woman who ain't THERE...who maybe..I'd never even met.
I've lived a few different places, moved some. If I was thinking of moving... Tahiti...Tibet... ain't do-able...so I skip them and deal with real options. US Politics being what it is.....were I President, the fact is that like Obama I could not get my top ideas past congressional gridlock