07-06-2012, 12:18 PM
Sorry, you misunderstood my use of the term, "stimulus". I was using the literal definition, not in the context of a "stimulus package or stimulus intervention" as we've seen in the past. Any agent or action, including stepping back, for the purpose of stimulating or improving a negative condition is "stimulus".
The only plan that either candidate could put forth which would not be considered economic stimulus (literally speaking) is to take no action and leave everything as it is today. Do you really think that's appropriate and the economy will auto-correct? I don't think that's prudent nor is it likely either candidate's agenda, imo.
I thought you were suggesting that lessening government's involvement in private business was in order, not leaving its current level of involvement unchanged?
The only plan that either candidate could put forth which would not be considered economic stimulus (literally speaking) is to take no action and leave everything as it is today. Do you really think that's appropriate and the economy will auto-correct? I don't think that's prudent nor is it likely either candidate's agenda, imo.
I thought you were suggesting that lessening government's involvement in private business was in order, not leaving its current level of involvement unchanged?