I ran across this Post this morning, and believe that all positions tend to poorly constructed discussing an obtuse point in data base construction. I would start my own evaluation by consideration of the technological support level per Child necessary to morally bring a human life in existence in any area. The basic thesis of technological growth based upon population becomes corrupted when local areas must be considered overpopulated; the place where human life can only be maintained by injection of foreign aid from outside the sized community. Population increase in these substandard subsistence areas lead to loss of educational opportunities, loss of natural intelligence due to nutritional deficiencies, and incapacities in foreign aid provision. It is of course probable that some of the population will survive with enhanced economic skills, but at what Cost? A lack of family planning can induce new waves of piracy and huge numbers of guerillas no better than bandits; none of which provides any growth potential for humanity, with a very real loss of humanity. It is all about What exactly that We teach to children in real terms, not academic discussion.
I like this argument from Paul Krugman; now, if only I believed it. I don’t believe in the Crowding Out effect; but likewise I don’t trust the Crowding In effect. Paul relies on economic models to come to the conclusion that the fed fund rate should be -5%. It reminds me of the old line from farmers that the new Milking machine could handle 20 Cows at a time, if only he had more than 8 Cows. Fiscal policy does not inject Income into individual households at the same rate as it is spent; and though Public Spending does aid Capital construction, it only leads to a higher level of competition for the missing Consumption dollar after the Public funds are finished. The worst aspect to the entirety of Public expenditures may be the misapplication of Investment funds by both Government and the Private Sector. It is what brought down the Soviet Union, and could well bring down the American economy.
Here is another example of trying to provide a Curative to a problem by the wrong methodology. Credit Cards should not be issued except upon provision of a Surety of some kind; which could replace any failure of payment conditions. Interest rates should be relatively uniform, else there is too great a venue for usury in all its classic splendor; I would love to see it be maxed at twice the current fed fund rate (has Business and Paul Krugman suffered heart problems yet), which would be an automatic stimulus without need of financial or fiscal policy. The Question of Age is ridiculous, as even Ten-Year Olds need Plastic. The problem lies in the fact that they need Debit Cards, not Credit Cards, and the transition between the Two should be forbidden; the best venue would be different size and style Cards of only singular purpose. A possible Solution may be Government mandate that all Credit Cards must print the Interest rate on the Cards themselves, and Card companies must cancel future Transactions if they do not like the listed rate of Interest. Who am I to introduce Reason into a drunken brawl where no one cares about tomorrow, only on getting what they want today. lgl