Speaking of Paul Krugman, I accept his argument that the way out of our long-term recession is by large increases in government spending. But now, how should I vote? One might think that voting for those tax and spend Democrats would be the obvious answer. And if the Democrats won large, fillerbuster-proof majorities in the House and Senate, and retained the White House, then yes, that would be the way to vote. Because the Democrats would most likely increase spending on things we need, like education and health care, and would raise taxes on the wealthy to help pay for it.
But what if the Democrats don't win large, fillerbuster-proof majorities? What if we continue to have split houses and a Democratic President? Then I think the Republicans in Congress would successfully block large spending increases on education and health care, and they would certainly block any increase in taxes on the wealthy. They would probably allow large increases in military spending, which would help increase employment, but since no tax increases would be allowed, either our deficit would continue to balloon, or we would need to decrease spending in other areas, wiping out any gains in employment we achieved by increasing military spending.
If all we are concerned about is raising government spending, the best way to do that (based on past experience) is to have a Republican president. If Romney is elected, then all talk of the need for fiscal responsibilty will suddenly vanish, just as it always does once a Republican is in the White House, and the federal government will start spending like a drunken sailor again. And Keynesian economics will win the day. Or at least until the burden of federal debt forces cuts in spending or...God forbid, tax increases.
So if all I'm really interested in is obtaining Keynesian policies, then I guess I should vote for...I can't bring myself to say it.
Not voting is looking better and better.