There's no one spending money right now except the federal government. So if the Feds stop spending, our economy will more than likely crash.
Now, you will hear a cry from the right to stop the spending and simply allow the markets to correct themselves on their own. It's a noble concept. But heres the problem. A weak economy equates to weak national security. No country in history has ever been able to have strong national security, while having a weak economy. I would advise everyone to review the ties between a strong economy and national security.
Allowing the markets to correct themselves is not the best idea, because no one knows how long it would take. An economy the size of the United States could take decades to rebound on its own. California is 1 state. California alone is the 8th largest economy in the world. The concept of letting the markets correct themselves can work on a local and maybe even a state level. But not on the national level, which is where the responsibilty for national security lays. You have to realize that a major reason many corporations are in this contry, is because of the stability the US Government is able to provide vs. other countries. IMO, one major problem with allowing the markets to correct themselves is that many of the players will simply move to other countries. Therefore, we would find ourselves starting from scratch, and that takes even more time.
So you have to ask yourself. How long can our national security afford to wait on the markets to return. How long would it take for other nations to figure out we cant protect ourselves. How long untill they realize we cant put gas in our military tanks, or pay to keep the lights on at our military training camps. What happens when, while the markets are recovering or rebuilding, other countries buy the latest military technology. No President will take this risk.
Carter authourized the bailed out of Chrysler. Reagan administered the Chryslers bail out, and he bailed out the banks. Bush authourized the bank bail out. Obama came into office with both the banking and the auto industry in trouble, along with 2 wars. Not to mention the housing bubble. But if you were review the Reagan, Bush, and Carter bailouts, you will see national security was part of the reason the decision was made to bail companies out. Reagan and Carter were not in the middle of 2 wars.
You can always pay down debt, once the economy coes back enough so that the government crutch can be removed. But it's pretty hard to lose, and then regain world dominance. Running up the debt, bailing out banks, and bailing out car companies are not a good ideas. But they are the lessor evils, and is much smarter than waiting for the markets to correct themselves.
Re: How can we Spend to Get Out Of Dedt, does that
There is 1 reply to this message
