Feed on
Posts
Comments

“that even three months ago, most economists would not have predicted the economy was “in as bad of a situation as we are in right now. “

– that was the President’s justification for why the stimulus spending bill has now topped $900 billion. That amount, by the way, is an increase in spending equivalent to the 15th largest economy in the world. Hey, we in America have a problem … how can we solve it? Spend Australia! (Australia’s total GDP is $900 billion).

 

And here is the President a few weeks ago:

“we are likely to learn that we lost more jobs than at any time since WWII,”

 

And here he is again:

“if nothing is done, this recession could linger for years.”

 

Now, if you can justifying the spending of Australia simply because our predictions of 3 months ago were overly optimistic, is there a law in human nature that suggests our current predictions cannot also be wrong? And can not also be wrong in the other direction? The last two comments by the President are perhaps more spurious predictions than the one he is complaining about at the start. If “ifs and buts” were beers and nuts we’d all have a heck of a party.

 

One Response to “How to Justify Spending Australia”

  1. Michael says:

    AIER was on top of the recession. It kills me the way that people keep referring to economists. If they are, they’re listening to ones who aren’t worth a darn.

Leave a Reply

books on zlibrary official