Normative Belief
In the wall street journal opinion editorial, Furman is trying to convince us to work things out the Keynesian way whereby he argues that congress ought to send a taxpaying U.S. resident $1,000 and $500 to every child who meets the same criteria.
Summary of author’s evidence
The author is using facts from the Keynesian view of macroeconomics whereby government spending should be used during times of recession to spur aggregate demand. Such issuance of money will be used to increase aggregate demand as an expansionary fiscal policy that will help to spur economic activity and get the nation from the recession conditions. The author bases his argument from previous experiences by former president Bush and Obama during the 2001 and 2008/9 recessions, but this time payments should be more generous.
Analysis of the Argument and Conclusions
Furman is biased in his application of Keynesian economics. In the article, Furman discredits the use of tax cut in increasing aggregate demand. He considers the tax cut of 2% of income or a whole year add insignificant because the effects on the economy would be too slow and dispersed, and the distributional effects it has are worrisome.
Reading through Furman article demonstrates that he has sound knowledge of Keynesian economics, especially on the role of government spending and tax cuts as the main ways of stimulating aggregate demand. The author concludes that the stimulus packages of $1,000 to every adult who is a U.S. citizen or a taxpaying U.S. resident, and $500 to every child who meets the same criteria should not be s simple one-time payment, but the payments should continue in 2021 if unemployment rate rises to 5.5%.
In the wall street journal opinion editorial, Furman is trying to convince us to work things out the Keynesian way whereby he argues that congress ought to send a taxpaying U.S. resident $1,000 and $500 to every child who meets the same criteria.
Summary of author’s evidence
The author is using facts from the Keynesian view of macroeconomics whereby government spending should be used during times of recession to spur aggregate demand. Such issuance of money will be used to increase aggregate demand as an expansionary fiscal policy that will help to spur economic activity and get the nation from the recession conditions. The author bases his argument from previous experiences by former president Bush and Obama during the 2001 and 2008/9 recessions, but this time payments should be more generous.
Analysis of the Argument and Conclusions
Furman is biased in his application of Keynesian economics. In the article, Furman discredits the use of tax cut in increasing aggregate demand. He considers the tax cut of 2% of income or a whole year add insignificant because the effects on the economy would be too slow and dispersed, and the distributional effects it has are worrisome.
Reading through Furman article demonstrates that he has sound knowledge of Keynesian economics, especially on the role of government spending and tax cuts as the main ways of stimulating aggregate demand. The author concludes that the stimulus packages of $1,000 to every adult who is a U.S. citizen or a taxpaying U.S. resident, and $500 to every child who meets the same criteria should not be s simple one-time payment, but the payments should continue in 2021 if unemployment rate rises to 5.5%.
This observation is in line with Keynesian economics on the problems associated with fiscal policy whereby a change in policy does not impact the macroeconomy immediately. Even after a policy change is adopted, another six to twelve months will generally pass before it will have much impact on the economy. Furman notes the same of the United States economy whereby the stimulus should continue until the scientists develop a vaccine and the normalcy begins to be restored.
Furman concludes by saying that it would be nice if a targeted medicine for economic policy makers to administer existed. That is because disruptions in supply chain and consumer consumption patterns cannot be predicted with accuracy, and a fiscal policy taken to cure such 
economic disruptions can be beneficial or cause further damage to the economy.
economic disruptions can be beneficial or cause further damage to the economy.
