This is nonsense economics that can only harm the economy.

How do you view rate cuts as a method of increasing production without understanding that higher rates are detrimental to that? Monetary policy has been greatly overused, primarily to hold down wages by maintaining a buffer stock of unemployed competing for jobs, although the excuse given for such callous policy is “inflation control”. That is wearing a bit thin given that the Fed has struggled to hit inflation targets since ’08 and many are saying our economy is in a dangerous deflationary cycle.

You, like most, have no understanding of how the federal government controls the economy or how debt at the federal level works. Simple dual entry spreadsheet accounting should tell you that a negative entry in any sector corresponds by accounting entity with a positive entry in another sector. Every dollar created in the private sector since our nation’s founding also created a dollar of debt in the government sector. That debt entry sits in waiting to balance any “revenue” to zero, making it impossible to directly fund federal spending with taxation of the private sector or borrowing. In the case of the government sector, there is only the non-government sector as a possible beneficiary of its red ink.

Deficit spending by the federal government is the only possible net source of currency in the non-government sector that isn’t balanced by private debt. Given that public money is required to retire private sector debt, store value in commerce/net save, or fund economic/population growth, the logical conclusion is that the national debt is nothing more than an accurate accounting of all money in circulation or savings after private sector bank debt is accounted for that hasn’t yet been returned to the government in payment of a tax obligation.

That this debt is represented by Treasury debt is the result of a self-imposed law by Congress that has no other purpose, sans a gold reserve to defend, than regulating interest and giving investors a welfare benefit of guaranteed public money (interest) in addition to the money created in deficit of taxation to enable the purchase of bonds. Nice work if you can get it. Positing this as a “funding” operation for federal spending is nothing short of deception.

Deficit spending creates the excess reserves necessary to purchase bonds, so its result, if left to market forces, would always be lower rates, not higher. The “natural” rate for fiat currency with healthy velocity and equitable distribution will always be zero, or below. This is hardly a condition beneficial to banks or the wealthy, so it isn’t presented as our reality in fiscal policy.

Further breaking down the non-government sector into domestic and foreign shows us that foreign claims on productivity, trade deficits, are a demand leakage, as is any extreme wealth accumulation/savings in the domestic sector. A healthy economy requires that federal budgets be in deficit almost all the time and that the Fed adopts a zero interest rate policy for the foreseeable future.

Also, given that unemployment can only be caused by taxation, the federal government should offer employment at a livable wage and with benefits to any labor the private sector rejects if it chooses not to set tax policy goals at 100% employment. Unemployment is evidence the government has taxed money with potential velocity too much or hasn’t spent enough.