That libril perfesser, Keynes' premise that running large budget deficits is economically stimulative is demonstratively true and our current economy is a great example. The misallocation of scarce resources that inevitably results from deficit spending virtually guarantees future economic dislocations, however. Supply and demand considerations are an economic reality and this reality exists in a communist or capitalist society alike.

Our housing bubble, fueled by the steroid of easy Fed credit, stands out as a terrific example; popping would affect every industry imaginable, and would negatively impact the timber industry, cement idustry, eclectrical, plumbing, transportation, etc. (not just Realtor's and builders pocket books.) National survival might well depend on deflating the buble slowly to keep it from popping.

When there is no reasonable expectation to run offsetting budget surpluses in the future, an ever-expanding federal debt guarantees eventual destruction of the underlying, free floating currency. In a controlled society, the Keynesian solution would be a possibility, but not probable. In our society neither political party would have the cajones to suggest it.

This administration's use of the tax of inflation becomes the only means by which future war expenses, social services, Medicare and Social Security and other liabilities can be paid. So today we find ourselves in the Keynesian dilemma whereby balancing the federal budget would be disastrous for consumer spending, which this administration has equated with "the economy." Local economies now depend on government employees salaries and government contracts. Consider all the industrial production dedicated to defense contractors and their employees.

Ayn Rand couldn't even conceive of the tangled web we have managed to weave. And poor Tom has to content to see this interpreted by all them libril perfessers. Pity.

Publius