Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
This is a fun question, so lets do it.
The idea behind the Government spending money during a downturn is interesting, typically speaking this is an artificial 'kick start' to the economy. Its exactly what people like you want, its taking money from the people least effected by a downturn (the wealthy) and moving it into the hands of the people most affected by the downturn, the less wealthy.
The wealthy dont spend as much as the rest of us. When money moves from their companies to themselves they invest and save most of it, so once the funds move from the company to the individual the Government has had their bite at the cherry.
This is why intelligent and effective tax policy is incredibly important. Not just: 'Take MORE!!!'
Moving right along though, one does not stimulate an economy by hiring more Government workers, one does it by providing public works. Building Great Big Things.
Pave a road, build a bridge, manufacture a power plant.
Something that provides public value in the future when the economy rebounds but in the moment puts dollars into the hands of the people that spend them.
Thats how this works. If we're all going to bitch and moan about economic policy while pointing our fingers at the glorious concept of public deficit spending during a downturn, an economic theory thats pushing 100+ years, then we should at least do it properly.
Just hiring more Government workers isnt the answer. Having 3 secretaries for the Premier or more people working at the passport office or hiring 'Teacher's Aides' is not a solution, its the generation of 'Political Capital' and I dont know how many times I've been rejected at the pub or a restaurant because I couldnt pay my bill with 'Political Capital.'
You have to be smart about it because while you're looking to spend money to get it into public hands and keep the wheels turning and trains running you are bringing fewer dollars through the door so you have to be really careful with the ones you've got otherwise you dig a hole that you can never get out of.
|
You are not wrong, but I don't think you give enough credit to the teachers aide. In the long term public works are a much better value for money however in the short term to stimulate every dollar spent helps.
That teacher's aide will shop at the local store requiring them to hire staff. That staff pays taxes and shops and increases the need for more jobs. This has a cumulative effect that will help stimulate the economy. The difference between them or the construction worker is stimulus vs investment. Both together move the economy forward and have their place. The fact that a large chunk of the deficit is due to capital works shows the NDP understands this and is not just borrowing to keep the lights on.
Hiring an unsustainable amount of staff isn't going to work I agree, but I disagree that the teachers aide doesn't assist in the help of the economy.