Blogging about international development, politics and living with disease.
this post's not here anymore
Just mentioning Krugman and Keynes in the same post shows where your proclivities lie.
1) depends where the money is spent/cut from but generally I agree2)1. They Won’t Stimulate Long-run Economic Growth.2) depends on the current tax level but at present I think only total ideologues thing the tax cuts wont cost money.3) same as 2 obviously you cant long run jsut substract stuff from surpluses or add stuff to themI think however there is beurocracy to cut I jsut am not sure national will be sucessful at cutting it.4) Just a little bit5) This is ideological it could easily be used to argue for communism 6) depends on how they are structured7) i agree.
by 5 I mean - most accept that you can't go all the way to perfect communism - ie there is some sort of a happy medium and having decided that that is the case whee it should be exactly is a matter for further debate.
Very good summary.The first comment: classic case of shoot the messenger.
Anon – hey thanks for locating my proclivities, I knew I left them lying around here somewhere.Genius – re 5 – just to clarify, I’m not arguing for perfect equality by any means; nor is Richard Wilkenson. Like you said what's required is a happy medium. We could argue forever where exactly that medium might be but, in my mind, it certainly isn’t anywhere in the ‘more unequal’ direction from where we are now. BTW – I just had a very quick flick through your blog, lots of interesting stuff (although we obviously disagree on a fair bit). I’ll link to it when I next feel up to html-ing…AJ – thanks for the compliment.
Nice work... good summary of the issues.
Post a Comment