An economic stimulus is a monetary or fiscal policy enacted by governments with the intent of stabilizing their economies during a fiscal crisis. The policies include an increase in government spending on infrastructure, tax cuts and lowering interest rates. In response to the 2008 financial crisis Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The Act included increased spending on energy, infrastructure, education, health and unemployment benefits. The Act will cost an estimated $787 billion through 2019.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No
@9F57D8Z2yrs2Y
The economy would’ve died. Keynes noted that as less and less people own capital saving is increasing in comparison to spending. It doesn’t take a genius to note that government intervention is occurring to maintain a steady flow of consumers.
While it's true that Keynesian economics suggests government intervention to smooth out the boom-bust cycle, it's equally important to consider the potential drawbacks. Centralized decision making can sometimes lead to inefficiencies and misallocations of resources. For instance, during the 2008 financial crisis, some argued that the bailouts rewarded reckless behavior by financial institutions. What do you think about the moral hazard this might create? Do you have a solution to prevent such issues while still maintaining a steady flow of consumers?
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
No, and the government should drastically reduce spending during recessions
@7YY64YV 11mos11MO
Stimulus is effective when performed in a decentralized manner without defiict spending and inflation.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, and collectivize all industry
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
We literally formed societies in the first place so that many people could come and work together to provide for each other, so that everyone could benefit from the production, labor, skills, knowledge, and care of everyone else in society, infinitely more than any one individual could achieve alone. Privatization destroys that by excluding society's resources, production, knowledge, etc. away from the rest of society and into the hands of a few private interests for their own personal gain. This is a terribly anti-societal, anti-democratic, and blatantly detrimental means of organizing… Read more
@9F7JDRQ2yrs2Y
Worker ownership of the means of production means bringing democracy to an incredibly hierarchical and authoritarian system—the workplace—and giving autonomy and control of workspaces to the people who operate them, not the people with the capital to buy the means of production and own the labor of working people. It also means bringing equality to the means of distribution and raising the quality of life for all people as opposed to our current system where quality of life is a commodity afforded only to those who can purchase it.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, the government should intervene to boost a recovery
@9FR6PN92yrs2Y
We are in extreme need for relief but also fixing housing for all citizens, food and medical costs. These are rights for every human on earth.
@983K76N2yrs2Y
Because if the recession of 2008-09 taught us anything, it's that government intervention during a recession will lead to people suffering from it during a lesser period then if it didn't.
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
The lack of government intervention before '08 is what led to it in the first place...
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, recession is a natural cycle that purges excess
@VulcanMan6 2yrs2Y
Recession is a natural cycle...under capitalism. Our current capitalist system is literally designed to undergo a cycle of recessions every few years (called the "boom-bust cycle") as a means of further consolidating wealth into the pockets of the already wealthy elites. That is why poorer people suffer during recessions yet the wealthiest owners get richer. Our system is literally designed to be this way, because this system is not good.
@Yaunti22yrs2Y
Wage slavery, poverty, and homelessness are all parts of capitalism. Capitalism gives free reign to businesses to inflate prices and markets as it sees fit. And then the businesses create problems every few years to condense the money, it's true. Capitalism needs to be repealed and replaced.
@9FR6PN92yrs2Y
I disagree that this is a valid reason to not provide much needed assistance to all citizens suffering due to the recession.
@ISIDEWITH8yrs8Y
Yes, but in the form of tax breaks for low income citizens
@9FL5M6M2yrs2Y
While providing tax breaks for low-income citizens can be an effective way to put money directly into the hands of those who need it most, it's important to consider the potential limitations of this approach. First, tax breaks often take time to implement and may not provide immediate relief in times of economic crisis. Second, tax cuts can lead to a reduction in government revenue, which may impact the government's ability to fund essential services and programs, including those that benefit low-income individuals. Additionally, tax breaks may not address the specific needs of cer… Read more
@98ZWDY52yrs2Y
No, set a universal basic income instead
@98D6Q8P2yrs2Y
No, set a universal basic income program instead
@9L4Z23BIndependent 1yr1Y
Yes, but be mindful of overstimulating the economy, increasing inflation rates, and increasing deficits on programs that do not increase GDP
Yes, in the forms of increased spending on infrastructure, tax breaks for low and middle income citizens, and lowering interest rates on student loans and credit cards
@9RKSSHQ10mos10MO
Yes, but only in very dire circumstances, and to those who need it most. Doing too much of this can lead to inflation later.
@Brandonnoe84Libertarian 4mos4MO
Yes, through using tax breaks for low income citizens and assisting sectors heavily hit by the recession
@9LD5YZN1yr1Y
Yes, but in the form of tax breaks for Middle and working class citizens, and increased spending on infrastructure.
@9PBT9SW11mos11MO
Yes, public spending like increasing funding for infrastructure and providing benefits that supports the consumers will improve the economy
@9SGS2K29mos9MO
Yes, by helping out individuals and small businesses to increase spending but not on large businesses that have caused themselves to fail
@9NBM7CLLibertarian11mos11MO
NO, Governments should maintain a 'rainy day fund' to bridge recessions and keep infrastructure spending constant.
@8T7FY2G4yrs4Y
Yes, but only to the people that need it
The government shouldn't just throw money around or give all the money to the richest people and companies under the guise of "too big to fail." Money should be put into the average person to instill confidence in the economy and facilitate the recovery.
Yes, but the stimulus should be widely accessible by all citizens, such as in national infrastructure jobs programs like the WPA during the 1930s.
@9FDDZ5B2yrs2Y
Yes but only in the form of monthly stimulus checks.
@8Q9PK9M4yrs4Y
Yes, but as pay for jobs to benefit the country such as infrastructure improvements, neighborhood and public cleanup, etc.
@8Q9XCNW4yrs4Y
Yes, but the current way of doing it is garbage. Cut all foreign aid and all aid that goes to large corporations and give it to lower-income American people who can't work during the pandemic.
@8PVR2HY4yrs4Y
Yes. Collectivize industries and reform from hierarchical company structures to things like coops, assist hard hit sectors, promote programs to get people to work along with ubi, and higher taxes on rich and confiscate profits from those who profit from economic downturns and disasters
@9CNX3B92yrs2Y
No, set a universal basic income instead
@8T9QTWF4yrs4Y
No, implement a universal basic income instead
@B58NX8HIndependent5 days5D
Neither and create an economic stimulus package bill to reform and refinance the economy by creating more jobs and more opportunities of employment
@B5539MX1wk1W
Too simple of a question. Depends on the cause of the recession, who is impacted...Yes in certain situations, no in others.
@B53MSN5 2wks2W
Yes, but only in extreme economic crisis like the Great Depression and not in less threatening times like COVID
@bionicle3812wks2W
Reducing spending in all sectors that are not critical, as most recessions are caused by the government.
@B4Z9PY62wks2W
yes, in the form of tax breaks for low and middle income citizens, and assisting the sectors most heavily hit by the recession.
It depends on the situación depending on the US government if they over spend they might owe way more than what the actual budget of spending. In times of ressesion the president should renegotiate a new lower Price tariffs to all outside of US and also make those countries have a peace treaty between commercial negociations
@B4M3GQ74wks4W
No, the government should ban fractional reserve banking and abolish the FED to stop recessions from happening, since they are an artificial phenomenon caused by state interference
@B4KLCSB1mo1MO
Give tax breaks to the middle class and the lower classes but increase them for the top 1% of earners and the government may need to bail out banks and other industries that are most affected by the recession
@B4FCJW4Republican1mo1MO
For the sake of capitalism, weak government, low taxes, and low national debt, only use it for those who are literally desperate for a job.
@B4D6KHP1mo1MO
For the sake of capitalism, low taxes, low national debt, federalism, weak government, and checks and balances, only distribute it to those who are literally desperate for a job.
@B4CSJFP1mo1MO
Yes the government should use economic stimulus to aid the country during times of recession but don't continue too much after the country recovers because it will start costing a lot of money to maintain.
@B48ZGNN1mo1MO
Yes, but a consortium of state level leaders should oversee the Federal Reserve, in order to protect against inflation.
@B3VGV2T 2mos2MO
Yes, using economic stimulus, such as tax cuts or increased government spending, can be a helpful tool for governments to aid a country during a recession, by increasing aggregate demand and potentially mitigating the negative impacts of a downturn.
How Economic Stimulus Works:
Increased Demand:
During a recession, economic activity slows, leading to decreased demand for goods and services. Economic stimulus aims to counteract this by injecting money into the economy, boosting consumer spending and investment.
Tax Cuts:
Tax cuts can increase disposable income, giving individuals and busines… Read more
@B3R83C82mos2MO
Yes, in the form of tax breaks for low income citizens while raising taxes on the wealthy by the same percentage
@B39MR8N2mos2MO
yes, we should lower taxes, nationalize failing industry, fix up infrastructure to attract businesses and assist sectors at risk of failure.
@86N5Z35Independent 3mos3MO
Sometimes, but it should not be the first option during a recession because of issues revolving around timing lag and incorrect application of Keynesian policies during expansionary times (politicians don't like running a budget surplus then to mitigate budget deficit later)
@B2V92KC3mos3MO
not to much enough to keep the country stable and create us jobs in that country we have to have spending value something the left and right is bad at
@B2SXHLQ3mos3MO
yes but be more selective with the industries and how much you give out. plus focus hard on tax breaks for people who make less then $200,000 a year.
@B2KW5BL3mos3MO
Get rid of the Federal Reserve so peoples savings aren't worthless when they fall on hard times. We all need to be responsible for ourselves.
@B2GCZXPRepublican4mos4MO
yes, but stop paying the taliban 60-87 million a week and use that money as stimulus checks to the US citizens.
@B2F9QX54mos4MO
Yes, but in the form of personal stimulus checks for middle and lower socioeconomic brackets only, with progressively higher checks inverse to a family's economic status.
@B28M7MC4mos4MO
It would depend on the state of the country and or inflict an reduction on unnecessary spending of the country.
@B24X3M9American Solidarity5mos5MO
Yes, the government should give citizens as much economic assistance as possible in times of economic uncertainty
@B24D5LP5mos5MO
We are at critical mass and need to reduce spending at large. If we need to assist, it should be through legitimate purchases in the economy, including investing in our infrastructure, not bailouts.
@B23BVT95mos5MO
Yes, focused on tax breaks for the poorest and infrastructure projects to improve/maintain economic efficiency.
@B22GDFT5mos5MO
Yes, but radically reduce spending at this time and offer tax breaks to the lower class, and do not shut down the economy like we did with Covid-19.
@9ZYNHQ4 5mos5MO
No, we should not have unspent tax money, and we should improve the economy and regulate it so that recessions don't happen
@9ZXVZHV5mos5MO
Not to large coporations that clearly aren't struggling. Banks should not be bailed out and instead we should reform the banking system in order to prevent another 2008.
@9ZWQVPX5mos5MO
No, recession is a natural cycle that purges excess, but tax breaks to citizens should be done in the event of recession to allow for easier recovery.
@9ZWJRG95mos5MO
The boom and bust cycle of capitalism must be abolished by establishing a transparent, accountable, post-monetary system of public enterprise which ensures freedom from want as a constitutional right.
@9ZRG8TB6mos6MO
Yes, but not to aid the wealthy in getting richer while they do nothing to support their workers and others in need
@9ZQPHSH6mos6MO
Yes but only in a flat tax environment where the surplus is publicly budgeted and agreed on through a casting of votes from the citizenry that is reported by the elected representation. Utilizing surplus to reduce national reliance on. Issuance of a statement to individuals that over pay is produced and provided to the citizens for a percentage tax deduction to the citizens that fall in certain tax brackets.
There are a lot of stipulations that would have to be hashed out.
@9ZPGK3Y6mos6MO
Depends on how bad the recession is. If manageable then let it run its course and government should reduce spending If really bad then it may provide economic stimulus
@9XLRCZ86mos6MO
The government should only use this when it is absolutely necessary to keep the economic part of our country staying afloat.
@9WXFZYN6mos6MO
Yes but in the form of subsidies to manufacturers and service providers to lower or maintain consumer costs for said products or services.
@9WTT3H97mos7MO
Yes, but only to people who work and pay wage taxes. If the unemployed can survive without income there is no need to give them money they didn’t contribute towards.
It is optional because it could lead to risks such as concerns about debt and inflation, but could also lead to job creation and prevent deeper recessions.
@9WL2Z6Q7mos7MO
Unfortunately, we waste billions of tax payer dollars on these programs. Any stimulus aid to corporations should come with a repayment plan. 100% should be paid back over time and with a small amount of interest.
@9WHKD2H7mos7MO
Yes, by prioritizing people who are most heavily hit by the recession and by drastically reducing government spending during recessions.
@9WDRHMK7mos7MO
it entirely depends on the situation and the type of aid used. it can be good or bad. should only be used to avoid catastrophic outcomes, limited to the minimum required and go to the most needed areas
@9WBNKV4Progressive 7mos7MO
Yes, in the areas hardest hit, and those that will have the greatest financial boost to the economy. Worst hit and biggest booster are not mutually inclusive.
@9RWZLPK 7mos7MO
No, governments should eliminate deductions and loopholes, and reduce taxes across the board with time limitation during recessions.
@9V8459T7mos7MO
No, Recession is a natural cycle that purges excess. Increasing government spending during times of recession only causes inflation. A recession is when the government should drastically reduce spending.
@9V5Z6587mos7MO
No, the government should tackle the causes of the recession in the first place instead of just giving people money.
Yes, but in the form of tax breaks for low income citizens, as well as in the form of assisting sectors most heavily hit by the recession
@9TLRXYP8mos8MO
The government clearly doesn't know what the hell it is doing in this regard considering the actual results.
@9TL8BH98mos8MO
the government should drastically reduce spending during recessions and should give tax breaks for all citizens
@9THZFQ58mos
The government should reduce regulations and requirements to start up businesses to boost the economy since the only way that the economy can really recover from a recession is to continue business as usual.
@9TC9YQD8mos8MO
Yes, with a focus on those most heavily impacted and ensuring assistance is more fairly distributed (ie, larger tax breaks for those hit more heavily, vs those who noticed a minimal or no impact)
@9T8WBF7 8mos8MO
Yes, but in the form of tax breaks, small but frequent allowances to civilians, and a focus on job recovery/support programs
@9STG858 8mos8MO
Yes, but the stimulus must never bail out people/companies that made risky/bad decisions. Infrastructure spending should only occur depending on the overall global economic circumstances.
@9SSTSKR 8mos8MO
It should depend on the cause of the recession, and who they support, making sure people have enough to survive is good, but making sure that larger companies don't lose any profit is not.
@9SS4TZ98mos8MO
Yes, but by providing tax breaks and stimulus to low income earners, and by investing in jobs in public infrastructure (transit, affordable housing, utilities, etc.)
@9SQLKLLIndependent8mos8MO
Yes, but ensure that the money comes back to the government in the end in the form of taxing the rich, since the money will flow to them in the end if steps aren't taken to prevent it
@9SPML49 9mos9MO
This policy should be moderated and proportional to the amount of other stimulating policies that are currently or not currently in place, such as UBI. They should not accompany already existing and highly stimulating policy such as UBI, but in the absence of such policies, other stimulus should definitely be considered and deployed.
@9SM7H8G9mos9MO
Yes; more money in wallets means more citizen spending means more prosperity means more tax revenue means everybody wins
@9SH6LSG9mos9MO
Yes, but only to people who can prove they are in need of the funding. Such as: immediate layoffs, etc
@9SFDBJZ9mos9MO
Yes, the government should help big employers and companies from strategic sectors (energy, defence) that show chances of recovery.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
