Add new comment

There are a lot of problems in this article. I don't mean I feel a different way. For the past little time I've viewed myself as a democratic socialist. First this article assumes that the deficit is not an issue. True, that the deficit and our gigantic level of debt is not as bad as would appear to an uneducated layman, our debt is still valued well and we appear to be having no issues in getting financiers of it. Our credit rating, although dropped from AAA to AA+ is still among the best in the world. And people seem to love our treasury securities simply because of the fact that we are so stable and because of the safe return they provide. But that doesn't mean it's not an issue. Reducing our national debt is a sound thing to do. It's much better to be a creditor nation than a debtor nation. Second of all, while government spending DOES increase economic activity and help get us out of a recession or sluggish growth cycle, this article acts as if the economy is completely devoid of any ability to heal naturally. Fiscal stimulus by the government is just one portion of the consumption function. And anyone who had any kind of economic sense would know that. Therefore either the author of this article is not familiar with fundamental economic theory in the slightest or someone is being blatantly dishonest in the way this article is worded. C+G+I-E=Y (Y being GDP) Government is just one part, and not even the largest of that function. I just felt like I had to write this rebuttal as a comment. It's shameful to see such slant coming from what I have found in the past to be a very reliable source of information.