It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How would YOU stimulate the economy?

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:26 PM
the answer to the problem is to stop giving money directly to the companies in trouble. Give this money to the people

introduce government grants for people to buy cars to invest in the car market for example... that way people are getting goods that they need, and the companies are getting the money they need.

At the moment the car industry (is/has) (being/been) bailed out, the money is going to the car companies to make more cars but the people, who cant afford the cars, are not getting any more money.

answer is simply to fund the solution, not the problem.

posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 02:28 PM
I would make it so that everyone who makes over, say, 500k a year gets the excess redistributed.

Because why would you need that much money, when so many people have so much less?

Tax cuts, making more jobs, and I would make it so everything that is sold has to have it's price lowered by a certain percentage.

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by sty

Nowhere did I say that THAT is our best approach to solve our current market calamity. You're putting words in my mouth. I'd like that to stop. I'm simply saying that the Fed as it is NOW is better than it would be under government hands. Sure, we wouldn't have interest, but we'd print money like there's no tomorrow and screw the future generations out of their wealth as we leech off the promises of the future. Is this not the basis of Keynesian economics?

Spend into debt now and make the future pay it back?

I've looked at Northern Europe and yes, they have some decent models, but none of which I completely agree with. If everyone were like me, then I would say - good, let's take one of these European systems like Finland's or Sweden's and use it here.

But you ignore several different variables.

1. Our size and population.
2. Our hubris.
3. Our culture

We have not had time to "mature" to this oh-so-inevitable destiny of realizing capitalism is evil and socialism is the future, as you proclaim. In fact, I would argue the contrary.

-6000 years ago, man was living in caves, communally, with two basic classes for everyone. Life was so much simpler then. There was no trade; everything was shared. Oh, and lifespans were short, people could slaves, etc. etc.

Seems to be that "capitalism" and individualism is TRUE progressivism, not as you leftists have opined for years "social democracy". If you remove gov't interference and thus all "communal" decision, everyone will act in a matter that fits rationally within the bigger picture.

By far, America is the closest country in the world of its stature to this ideal. That's why it's been an experiment. And I might add, it served us the first 200 years of our existence fine, until we started adopting these "ideas" that seemed so bloody obvious to you guys across the pond.

new topics
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in