3 ms·
First, the rise in spending is 2x. That's a huge effect, and there's nothing in 2019 that would explain it reasonably. And it only leads the bills' enactment
by ajross 3y ago
First, the rise in spending is 2x. That's a huge effect, and there's nothing in 2019 that would explain it reasonably. And it only leads the bills' enactment by a few months. Isn't the more obvious hypothesis that people started investing speculatively a few months ahead of the bills? I mean, these bills largely amounted to campaign promises. It was abundantly clear after November of 2020 ensured a trifecta government that something along these lines was going to pass.
Second: you're basically making stuff up with that 2019 argument. That's not the way incentive spending works at all. If you have free money on the table as a corporate executive you record that revenue immediately, you don't put it in the bank to "plan". In fact, most bills like this make it largely impossible to "save" the funding anyway, and for exactly this reason: politicians want their results now, now in the next administration.