> It's basically been disproven at this point that simply lowering cost does not necessarily lead to better outcomes for the country. This was basically neo-lib

> It's basically been disproven at this point that simply lowering cost does not necessarily lead to better outcomes for the country. This was basically neo-liberal orthodoxy until the mid 2010s, by which point it was clear that lowering costs by offshoring labor had hollowed out the middle class in America. Money has a multiplyer effect. Each dollar spent is received by someone who then goes on to spend a part of that dollar and so on. So if you take dollars and send them elsewhere, that multiplyer effect is dampened. Things may be cheaper, but the economy is worse overall. Literal gibberish. What you are describing is a fiscal multiplier which is the change in national income via government spending, or a money multiplier from a central bank. What actually happens in the scenario described is deadweight loss. Consumers spend more to obtain less goods. See figure 1. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/price-floor/ https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/ec...