If earlier QE spending has not acheived better results, maybe it was
-> not enough and
-> not correctly targeted.
Republicans argue that it is instead less government, even eliminating government altogether, that would turn the American economy into a jobs-creating machine.
Right. Because anarchy works so well to create jobs in Haiti and Somalia ?
Strong economies in Germany and China do not actually seem to be correlated with less regulation nor do earlier, happier times in the US economy.
At issue here is the kind of regulation. Is a particular piece of legislation designed to protect and strengthen citizens in general or is it aimed at promoting the interests of a specific lobby? This kind of legislative gerrymandering to promote specific businesses is just as corrosive to the economy as redrawing voting districts to protect incumbents is to democracy.
Eliminating these special interest exceptions and directions in law would eliminate fingers on the scales of the economy AND clarify regulations so that they are easier (and cheaper) to follow and enforce.
At the same time, a positive role exists for government action to enable its citizens to better compete in the world:
-> Funding research institutions; Money for student loans, bursaries and scholarships.
-> Improved transportation, electrical and communication infrastructures.
-> Protection from random disasters like flood or cancer (Why do Americans understand the need to share burdens of weather disasters but not of medical disasters ?) 
No comments:
Post a Comment