Yeah, it might have been 1.8. I'm not certain
national infrastructure needs alone, especially bridge related, would likely cost trillions. Wouldn't put 100M people back to work in a year, but something needs to be done to decaying transportation systems in this country.
I've seen the writeups on this "decay" and found the direness of the situation quite unconvincing.
At any rate, a lot of stimulus money did
go toward infrastructure projects, only slowly and in much less than trillion-dollar amounts. The lack of timeliness is part of what I mean when I talk about a lack of valuable investments to go around. If something takes years to get underway, it's not gonna do shite to return the economy to full employment now. And while it's in progress (road construction) resulting traffic delays will damage productivity, making the projects cost society much more than just the outlays. Scenarios where it's still worth it are not as common as you'd imagine. "Fixing our crumbling infrastructure" is not a magic bullet
As far as the healthcare gripes go I suppose they might have something to do with the macroeconomy, if you're talking about fixing inefficiency and getting better health outcomes with the same resources (or the same outcomes using less resources). Of course, when our policymakers' weapon of choice there is regulation, that outcome is unlikely
This post was edited on 5/1 at 4:49 pm