Liberals don't push 'Keynes' - they push 'big spending all the time as a means to redistribute wealth' - and use the cover of 'Keynes' as credibility. 'Keynes'

Liberals don't push 'Keynes' - they push 'big spending all the time as a means to redistribute wealth' - and use the cover of 'Keynes' as credibility. 'Keynes' advocated for gov. spending in downturns and saving in upturns. The problem is: A) Progressives want to spend, infinitely. There is no 'saving period'. Ergo - it's nothing to do with Keynes really. B) It's really hard to tell what a 'downturn' is. 'Restoring confidence in markets' and picking up some infrastructure spending when industry is in a lull - this is on paper - a great idea. BUT - when a market has undergone a 'secular shift' - meaning that the lost jobs are not due to cyclical issues, but are permanent ... then the government ends up throwing good money after bad. Put another way: Keynes urged spending in down cycles to level out volatility and stabilize employment. But any given downturn may not be a 'cycle' - with an impending uptick. A 'downturn' may be permanent - like 'lost jobs to China' etc.. The 'solution' to a downturn has to be commensurate with the causes: cyclical shift? Ok, some infrastructure / gov investment might help. Millions of jobs lost to China? Gov. spending will only delay the inevitable. Better to invest in 'retooling' the workforce etc.. But this is not an 'economic' solution - it's a business/strategy solution and it takes intelligence.