From Dan Roberts at The G.
Essentially, a quick economic recovery would be a bad thing because it would reduce the pressure for a fundamental change to the system.
To which hte logical response is, if we have a quick recovery then we don\’t need a fundamental change to the system. What we had was a collapse of a shadow banking system and a nasty little recession. Both have happened in the past, both will almost certainly happen again.
Losses look like being around 3 or 4 % of GDP plus two years of trend growth….another 3 or 4 % say.
Compare and contrast this loss (which might occur what, once every 20 to 50 years?) with the loss of 0.5% or 1% of trend growth per annum which we\’d have (at least I think we\’d have) from the greater involvement of the bureaucrats and the politicians in the allocation of capital across the economy.
Better to have the booms and the busts than not to have the cumulative growth perhaps?