So this is my first attempt at a logical formulation of an argument

Economics Economics Questions
1

Tell me what you think, or if I’m missing something.

A government starts a program to encourage the purchase of products. These products, since the government is encouraging their purchase and not something that the consumer was willing to buy with his own money, must then be products that the consumer does not really want. Since these products are being purchased, people are employed in the manufacture of these products. This constitutes a net drain on the economy as an economy is meant to serve the needs of the people. People are employed producing things that people do not really want. Since people are spending then they are not saving and a future can never be planned for. Therefore, starting an induced demand program must result in total government control of the economy because we can never move on from that situation. This is the bottom of the spiral and in the end we are worse off than if the government did not induce demand in the first place.

Instead: What causes unemployment in a particular field is overvaluation. The now lost jobs were producing things that people did not really need and so production must be shifted toward the things that people really want. This natural shift occurs via a reduction in consumer spending in certain areas. Simply put, where the money is, there so the jobs should be. Government intruding on the process constitutes hampering the economy.

So what do you think? If this is right, I think it could be expanded to show the folly of stimulus packages during a recession.

2

that’s a little black and white.

I tend to think of subsidies as a tariff on all the products that weren’t subsidized. this renders competition unfair and price information innacurrate (which is important because prices are how you know hether something is in demand in the first place).

3

So doesn’t that get people into jobs that are worthless and get people to save less, including all of the effects that I have listed?

4

I wasn’t disagreeing. I’ve just found that making it very black and white hinders effective agumentation because it gives your opponent a clear point to disagree with, even when that point isn’t that important to the overall argument.