Peter,
I am not a fan of the editorial policy of The Economist. It is anti-Trump.
Actually it is a good idea that reductions in spending kick in slowly.
Our US non-Defense spending is 17% of the total US GDP. If we take
that down too quickly the economy tanks. And with the size of the
national debt we could be in serious trouble. If we cut stuff like
USAID it has a marginal impact. Some iof that money stays in NGOs in
the US, but a lot goes overseas so it does not have a negative impact
on GDP.
Government workers leave with 8 months continued salary. Thus no cut
to spending. Over that 8 months some will fully retire, others will
find other jobs, some private, some public sector jobs. And some folks
may even be hired to replace those let go. Thus the impact on GDP will
be very incremental and may not even be noticed.
That is another reason to consider the $5,000 to each taxpayer. It is
a return of their money, conscripted from then (taken by force), and
in all likelihood a large percentage will go into the economy to
offset any drop in the GDP. Some may paydown credit card debt which
will make the banks operating credit card divisions stronger.
So far from my perspective it is all good.
MAGA, hank
Hank Hohenstein, OFS
Land Steward
161 Osprey Vista
Shady Cove, OR 97539
Cell: 541-973-5442
hankhohenstein@gmail.com