Nick Gillespie posts a sharp rejoinder to the latest Jonathan Chait attack on him here.
(Of course, Chait, in the attack article, shows his ignorance of macroeconomics and modern monetary theory after ridiculing those who don’t understand economics. But I’ll just mention that in passing here.)
In the comments section, someone named Don said:
Also, totally dishonest to characterize Gillespie as an apologist for “deficit financed” tax cuts. I don’t think Gillespie’s proposal for “financing” tax cuts is by increasing the deficit? Did anybody read it that way? This guy is a total crank.
I will restate my reply to Don here:
I’m an apologist for deficit financed tax cuts to boost aggregate demand during a recession even if Nick is not. And I believe that if Nick were fully informed and thinking clearly about it, he would be too.
One reason I post here (Reason.com/blog) is to get more libertarians to see the light on this issue.
When 10% of people are unemployed, it means the country isn’t producing all it could. That is a disaster that holds back standard of living increases and compounds forever in the future (anti-compounds, if you will). And thanks to the fiat money system, it’s easy to get people to be more productive in a recession and boost aggregate demand. And the best way to do that is to deficit spend by taking less money in taxes until the economy no longer has excess capacity.
I’ll be attacked (as always) for stating this truth, but I figure it’s worth it if just a few intelligent people check it out or think it through on their own.