2 ms·

You seem to be confusing the concept of money going into and out of the economy with "return on investment".

• sharemywin 5y ago
  It can work that way if: 1. there's enough market competition. monopoly power and rent seeking is low. 2. the stimulus is slowly introduced to give time for the market to react. 3. the mostly state regulations but also federal regulations are small enough to all new business to form. and those small businesses have access to capital. 4. all of the above are reasoned and tweaked by rational adults with a background in statistics, science and engineering instead of idiots with slogans. Obviously that's a fantasy land. so here we are.
• xondono 5y ago
  Parent called it a return. The “return”, or benefit of the operation can’t be properly understood without taking into account that you’ve taken that 20M$ from some people to give it to (presumably) others.
  • mecha_ghidorah 5y ago
    I don't think they called it a return, they said it did return. They don't mean it in the sense that there was a profit made in terms of benefit, the benefit they are describing comes via the money changing hands and allowing all the people it exchanges through being able to get something. You give it to the hungry, they buy food, the people who run places that sell food do things like buy new clothes and tvs, the people who make clothes and tvs invest in things, etc. At least as I read their argument they are suggesting a "trickle up" effect, whereby cash in the hands of people who aren't in a position to just park it in real estate or something gets spread around and improves the overall flow of cash in an economy, not the overall amount of cash