I guess a lot of people don't remember FDR and how he got us out of the Great Depression. Well, just in case you didn't know FDR spent us out of the Great depression. He put americans to work fixing and improving america. We need to invest in our infrastructure badly because we are behind the modern world on that front. We need to stop demonizing teachers and pay them well so they have an incentive to teach our children. We are 25th in the world in education...... pathetic. We need to stop subsidizing these corporations. A lot of these corporations are on "welfare." Not only that, a lot of them pay little to nothing in taxes. We need to penalize these corporations for operating overseas for cheap labor. We need to raise minimum wage. We need to stop demonizing government programs in general. We need to get all of these clowns out of congress and put well educated, qualified people in their positions, like economists.

No he didn't.  Just about No Economist has believed that for 20+ Years.  Right or Left wing.

Even the most left wing economists think the New Deal was a HUGE failure because it wasn't big enough... and now suggest it was WW2's massive spending that got us out of WW2.  (Though... WW2 in a lot of ways was also a case of extreme austeirty.)

So yeah... put in economists in the polticians place and....

well.  They'll actually agree with your position less on that.

Yeah... and a lot of Australia's growth in the past 20 years has been a huge commodities boost of raw matierials.

While the UK's GDP Growth has mostly all been in it's banking sector.   

The UK is honestly... doing strikingly well when you consider the main driver of their growth has been the same area that had a huge collapse.

It's not like you guys have huge swarths of untapped land and resources or even a lot of real estate. 

Are you an economist? Because I'm pretty sure you're not. I'm also pretty sure you don't talk to any economist at all. You just stated your oppinion, not fact. Show me some proof that no economist has believed that in 20 years. Good luck on that. You also proved my point, check the bolded. The new deal an WW2 were both factors in our recovery, and to deny that is not only extremely unfair, it's completely wrong. From my understanding economist believe both were a boon for our economy and got us out of a reccession. It was never considered a huge failure, except by you. You also failed to prove me wrong. All you succeeded at was confirming my argument that spending is what gets us out of reccessions. So let me try your method of arguing....... The proof is in history and every economist in the last 20 years agrees with my position, and if they were in congress they'd actually agree with your position less on that. Because you know, I talk to every economist on the planet, plus I'm psychic!

Also, you are sooooo wrong to say WW2 was a case of extreme austerity. What history books did you learn from? WW2 had nothing to do with austerity for the US. How can you practice austerity when the country is spending like crazy? The government legalized hemp to help the war effort so there were more jobs. Women were working in force. So where do you get austerity? Why did I never learn of this in school? Lets not rewrite history please.

A)   I don't know how you want me to prove that... I'd just suggest looking at an economics textbook.  Or really any one economist.  Even Paul Krugman agrees the New Deal didn't fix the great depression... and he threw away his economist credentials a good long time ago.

I mean... put it this way.  Ben Bernake is an economist right?   Leader of the Federal Reserve and all that... who does he think was right about the Great Depression?   Milton Freeman.

In general, after the GFC people were talking about if there would be  a resurgence to Keynsian economics... because Keynsian economics died in the era of Jimmy Carter.

B) That's what some left wing economists think.  That the New deal wasn't big enough... Monetarists though... who are the majority... not really.  It's why they have very specific stimulus plans now.  The old ones didn't work because simply priming the pump doesn't work.

C) What history books did I learn from?  The normal ones.   Also first hand accounts.

Here's a question for you.... what was World War 2 like for the average person.

Ever hear of a Ration Book?  WW2 was NOT a return to prosparity for people.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2095699

GDP rose during WW2... because government spending is part of GDP.  

If the treasury printed money equal to 3 times are GDP and congress passed a bill to pay it all to Jay Leno so he could burn it in a giant fire in Burbank, we'd raise our GDP by 300%!  Would you actually suggest the economy recovered?

The actual economy didn't actually get a lift until years after WW2.  If you look at Gross National Product.   That is GDP WITHOUT government spending.  You find that it shrunk during the war.

Why?  The people had forced austerity as all of our precious resources went towards tanks, bullets and war rations. 

The economy improved when the war ended.  Because the war ended.  Because those industries could return to making products worth.  Aggregate Demand caught up to Aggregate Supply, because people were forced to live austeire lifestyles and demand got pent up.  Once people didn't have to get gas stamps to stop hitler, buy all of their food out of preassigned cookbooks, consumption went up... I wonder why.  Because personal consumption was held back... not stimulated!

WW2 had the exact opposite intended effect as todays stimulus polices. (Both right and Left wing) which attempt to create personal consumption.

I mean... step back and ask yourself.  Do you think the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have helped the economy?  If the answer is no... (and i'd hope it was).  Why?  What made WW2 different from Afghanistan and Iraq?  Would our economy and living standards suddenly improve if we went to war against Iran?  Korea?  The Europeon Union?

D) It's also worth noting, that those same people who created the new deal thought the economy would collapse after WW2... when it did the opposite.

We need to update our infrastructure more than anything. We still use sewers from the Victorian ages for example and there are still many post-industrial scars that need to be rebranded and reused for something (its depressing seeing so many empty buildings in some areas!). Thank god we got the olympics which put some money in East London. and we also must re-diversify our economy, relying on mostly services can't be good. 

Conservatives these days seem to be totally against public spending of any kind regardless of its benefits to the economy and society as a whole. WW2 spending during and after the war helped contribute towards the prosperity of the years that followed. WW2 was needed for the world economy to fully recover from the 1930s Great Depression. The 1950s and 1960s are regarded as the two most prosperous decades since WW2. The sacrifices made in WW2 benefited both society and the economy as a whole. 

Austerity doesn't work because none of these governments are implementing true austerity. You have to completely hit rock bottom and eliminate all the bad debt and mal-investment. Trimming around the edges and talking a lot about it doesn't do the trick.

Just give some of these countries some time.  We haven't hit rock bottom yet.  The reason I know this is because not enough people are concerned enough about the enormous growth of the federal government and the enormous growth of the debt.  When we've truly gone over the cliff and have to face facts because our currency doesn't buy anything and there are no jobs, then people will panic and we'll actually cut something.

Clearly, we haven't reached that point in the US yet.  I'm sure it's coming, though.  In our lifetime.

Upgrading the sewers is fine and all... that's not going to help the economy though.  Hell you'll probably lose jobs since i'm guessing those kind of sewers run better.

As for fixing post industrial scars... that's exactly what austerity plans are suppoesd to include.   Pro buisness reforms to attract buisness.

Since Austerity is  a lot like cutting costs at a faiing resteraunt.   All it does is buy you more time.

If we were looking at it through John Maynard Keynes perspective... Stimulus spending probably actually wouldn't be his first suggestion.   He'd likely find it a waste of money currently.  Why?  The United Kingdoms HUGE trade imbalance.   He would find it illogical to spend stimulus money when a lot of it would end up overseas and would first suggest trying to eliminate the trade balance.   He'd probably want to cut ties with the Euro.  He was for the Bancour, but that was back when the rich countries were the ones with the trade surpluses.

Afterall, how does a demand driven muliplier work, when the majority of the money we buy go back to foreign manufacturers and producers?    You go out an buy a bunch of Nintendo games with your stimulus money, and the majority of your money is going straight to Japan.

What would Keynes want... the government to spend... to give the rich incentives to invest in the USA and UK.

I'd suggest the Economic Consquences of Peace if you have time.  It's free because the publishing rights have expired.  (Oops, in the US.  You may want to check United Kingdom Copyright law before reading)

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15776

It'd likely give you a fuller understanding of Keynes.  

One look at Japan will show where the US will end up if it keeps up it's current spending habit's.