Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

muriel_volestrangler

(106,703 posts)

4. And this, of course, might mean the 'fiscal cliff' might have been more dangerous

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 06:44 PM

Jan 2013

(depending on whether anyone had been listening to the IMF, or if they were already ignoring them). The effect of passing no laws over the new year, and letting everything expire, would have been to cut government spending (and cut the ability of the 99% to spend too). It was forecast to cause a recession; this may mean the recession would have been worse than thought.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An amazing mea culpa from the IMF�s chief economist on austerity [View all] n2doc Jan 2013 OP

The only surprise here is that they're admitting it. Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #1

K&R tk2kewl Jan 2013 #2

"No one could have foreseen...." magellan Jan 2013 #3

And this, of course, might mean the 'fiscal cliff' might have been more dangerous muriel_volestrangler Jan 2013 #4

It's great to see the bullshit ideologies discredited. Redfairen Jan 2013 #5

No shit, Sherlock. bemildred Jan 2013 #6