[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

“Consumers won’t spend. Businesses won’t invest. This is despite a massive increase in the money supply from the Fed that has made borrowing very inexpensive. The private sector is just not doing its part.”

Here is a real-life article that repeats the preposterous MSM argument (from Pelosi etc.) that government spending "drives the economy." The name of the article is Deep Spending Cuts Pose A New Threat To US Economy Unemployment benefits provide about $300 a week. Most of that money quickly and directly boosts consumer spending, which drives the economy.

Sickoflibs explained this argument's "justification:" The rich have money they don't need, so we will find a good use for it for it NOW!

The president indicated that “some of my advisors are urging me to take sterner measures. They say that the problem lies in relying upon voluntary compliance with the government’s incentives and encouragement. They counsel more direct instructions, narrower tolerances for deviations, and stiffer penalties for disobedience. I hope it won’t have to come to that, but I can (Typo, should be "can't") wait too much longer for results.”

Good writers like you make us mentally conjure up a believable Obama saying those words. Convincing and funny, but also

[sickoflibs]

RE:”Sickoflibs explained this argument's “justification:” The rich have money they don't need, so we will find a good use for it for it NOW! “

The Democrats wrap their pseudo moral arguments with contrived economic arguments. Those economic arguments go ‘Handing out other’s peoples money stimulates jobs’ and ‘socialized medicine costs less than privatized medicine'.

But the (real) liberal moral argument is simple :”The rich have money that others need more than them”