15 Aug '11 21:04>
Originally posted by no1marauderI read the article and he did call for infrastructure spending. I've been saying the same thing for years and government would never approve anything that was big enough to jolt the economy and infrastructure spending was far too little. Most of it was for other stuff and I determined the "powers that be" did not want a recovery and this economic mess was by design. Like Krugman said in the article, "We seem to be doing our best shot at recreating the Great Depression".
He's been saying it for years. He said it a couple of weeks ago AGAIN:
So this is a really good time to borrow for infrastructure spending, which we badly need and which would create jobs at a time when we badly need jobs.”
http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/01/krugman-we-are-repeating-the-mistakes-of-the-1930s-value-added-tax-plausible-solution/
It seems to me that "the powers that be" are doing just that. This is by design so they can create order out of chaos that will benefit them at our expense. After all, there must be a reason our government wants to spend smaller stimulus amounts over time rather than spending it all at once to actually have a chance at recovery. Almost all of the money should have been in infrastructure spending but it wasn't. It was like it was designed to fail.
However, now some are saying that all that WW2 spending was not all that effective. The article I posted mentions that we had a brief recession after all that spending. Peter Schiff claims that the economy didn't recover until after spending was cut, contrary to the claims of Krugman and even myself since I believed and said the same thing. You seem to be in the same camp as well, right?
So were we right or wrong? Does Schiff have a point or not?