Bombs or Bridges, Paychecks or Profits
Paul Krugman wrote a column about government spending in which he suggests that the decision comes down to either bombs or bridges. Rep. Barney Frank calls some of his colleagues "Weaponized Keynesians". He defines them as people who believe "that the government does not create jobs when it funds the building of bridges or important research or retrains workers, but when it builds airplanes that are never going to be used in combat, that is of course economic salvation."
Mr. Krugman says that the difference is that bridges get used and bombs don't. He defers to Mr. Keynes who noticed that wholly "wasteful" government spending (on weapons that will never be used) was preferred to partly "wasteful" forms, which, because they are not wholly wasteful, tend to be judged on strict "business" principles. Mr. Krugman accepts the idea that government spending on weapons systems is preferred because it
Mr. Krugman says that the difference is that bridges get used and bombs don't. He defers to Mr. Keynes who noticed that wholly "wasteful" government spending (on weapons that will never be used) was preferred to partly "wasteful" forms, which, because they are not wholly wasteful, tend to be judged on strict "business" principles. Mr. Krugman accepts the idea that government spending on weapons systems is preferred because it
