Actually you would expect to see an improvement in economic conditions relative to a world in which there had been no stimulus. If you know of a way to objectively and accurately measure this I'm all ears.yes, but then you would expect to see recovery.
No I wouldn't, since that is a completely different premise from what I am arguing. I stated that deficit spending (which can take the form of more spending OR more tax cuts) is stimulative to the economy...as opposed to "austerity" (i.e. cutting spending and/or raising taxes) which generally puts the brakes on the economy.huh. interesting you should say that.
how about this, if we were to look at the attempts at fiscal stimulus over the past few decades in each of the OECD countries, and it could be consistently demonstrated that the ones who had attempted to "stimulate" their economy through an increase in transfer payments had just as consistently failed to do so, while countries who had instead cut their business taxes had consistently succeeded in doing so... would you accept that as evidence?
The first article is subscribers-only so unfortunately I cannot read it.Huh, Would You Look At That...
But It's Interesting That You Should Mention Mankiw.
The second article shows Mankiw arguing forcefully for a Keynesian approach to stimulating the economy via deficit spending, which was exactly my point. He is merely arguing that we need to lean more toward tax cuts and less toward spending than we currently do. Among economists, there is very little support for austerity measures or reducing the deficit at the present time...anywhere across the ideological spectrum.