Nonsense. During a full employment GDP gap, AD has been shifted to the left thereby lowering overall demand. Why has this shift occurred? Because spending has been reduced which is why government has the means necessary to "smooth" out the effects.
Ah ha! Now we are getting somewhere. But to make a truly telling analysis, we have to dissect the nature of investment demand. Why..... Oh why do private investors feel the need... the desire... to invest into low yield securities offered by the public when they can put money into various aspects of private debt or equities that pay far greater returns?
Ill wait
What will suddenly drop the uncertainty facing both consumers and/or producers?
Nope! First and foremost, not all industries face decreased marginal profitability due to cap and trade. Secondly, the effect (cost) of health care reform is quite ambiguous in respects to firm profitability. You are going to have to do more than make blanket assertions.
Relating health care reform not sponsored by talk radio to shooting ourselves carries no merit. The costs of medicare are needed to be reduced long term if any talk of fiscal responsibility is to be taken seriously.
Going back to EGTRRA in 2001, what was the net effect of the Bush tax cuts? 2/3 were saved and not spent thereby negating the entire premise of tax cuts based on the guise of stimulation (what you are perceiving them to be). As deficits increase, tax cuts cannot be internalized by tax payers as being "permanent".
It most certainly is. A $1.5 trillion infrastructure stimulus would have been optimal (especially if we could have phased it into a three year plan).
Have you lived under a rock? The largest aspect of the current stimulus was in regards to tax cut/breaks.
With a balanced budget (no deficit), the debt will naturally expire as stipulated on the investors purchase of various instruments. You cannot make a 30 year treasury expire any sooner.
Care to expand on this a tad bit more with some quality sources? Not that i disagree with your premise entirely, but i feel you are leaving things out as a matter of convenience.
I am only explaining one of the main concerns in regards to international trade. You are the one claiming we do not need as many American farmers.
First, we have to consider the net effects on international trade before we can assume other positive externalities of free trade agreements.
That does not answer my question (weak attempt to shuffle). In the absence of US regulatory authority, would all private firms self regulate?
Care to provide a quote?
I can agree. But we must first consider what draws immigrants (legal or illegal) into the black market.