A Flawed Argument

To the Editor:

It truly is “curious” that a major concern of Mr Eppers, as stated in his letter to The Bee dated February 16, 2009 [“Change You Can Believe In?” Letter Hive, 2/20/09], is as follows: “What President Obama espouses is a return to an economic theory known as Keynesian economics.” Although a nice conservative sound bite, it is a flawed argument in many ways, including the fact that Mr Eppers conveniently uses only half of the Keynesian principle in his argument and uses, as a matter of comparison, President Reagan’s “fiscal discipline.”

 In fact, the policies of President Regan led to some of the highest deficit spending in the nation’s history during the 1980s. A true supporter of Keynesian economics believes it is the government’s job to smooth out the bumps (or mountains) in business cycles. Intervention in bad economic times comes in the form of government spending with tax breaks in order to stimulate the economy and government spending cuts and tax hikes in good times, in order to curb inflation. It is my understanding that the government spending via new or increased initiatives in bad times and the government scaling back or eliminating these initiatives in good times are the key components. Mr Eppers seems to define Keynesian economics by using only half of the total policy. The entire policy needs to be articulated in order for one to pass judgment on its merits. President Obama is not offering a total Keynesian package, but is offering governmental initiatives and revenue adjustments.

Ronald Reagan actually spent massive federal monies on the military while reducing taxes (deficit spending), which ultimately led to an actual deficit. George W. Bush spent trillions of dollars of federal monies while lowering taxes on the wealthy (deficit spending), which also ultimately led to an actual deficit. These are recipes for failed budgets, whether it is in your home, your state, or in your federal government. Therefore, I can’t tell if Mr Eppers is for or against deficit spending. Does it depend if it’s a Republican or a Democrat? I find that “curious”!

Was President George W. Bush culpable, ignorant or just misguided when his administration stated that the basics of our economy are strong? Perhaps it really is the fault of Bill Clinton and the Democrats, for leaving such a large surplus for George W. Bush and the Republicans to manage and turn into an enormous deficit. Those Democrats are always messing things up for those Republicans. It spite of the facts, how much time will pass before Obama is blamed by conservative zealots, driven by the omnipresent conservative media, for creating the budget crisis he inherited. The over/under is six months … maybe less!

Regards,

Richard English

3 Curry Drive, Newtown                                           February 20, 2009