Why the intense urgency? They shouldn't drag this out but there is no bigger pile of debt they are racing to defuse before some big cascade of liabilities goes off. The crash has already happened and the worst risks already basically contained. They have time to be careful with the details.But they are racing against time for getting this right.
This is true but I don't see why it should take on that debt to fund social expenditures, or why you think that would be good for growth. The federal government has taken on collosal debt over the past 30 years to fund social security and Medicaid as progressive taxation has been effectively eliminated, and yet the economy has not grown nearly fast enough to pay even a small portion of that off.So many ways - but all roads lead back to the central government taking on additional debt.
You're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars a year in medical insurance, education expenditures, pensions etc. doing that for even a couple years would create an enormous amount of new debt without providing significant growth impetus. Prior to the pandemic these things were already being paid for with debt, just indirectly through land sales. That didn't result in a big boost to growth. And yes cg debt would have much lower interest, but why even do that when taxes can already pay for it while also achieving other important goals at the same time?
I'm not familiar with the ricardian equivalence principal but I have read Kalecki's selected essays, and I'm also not retarded. I do not believe that the effect of a given quantity of real taxation on the economy is time-invarient and I'm sorry if I implied as much.
The cake can and will continue growing but providing something resembling a comprehensive suite of modern social services to 1.4 billion people is really goddamn expensive and the richest 300 or so million of those people will have to accept a significantly higher overall tax burden for it to happen, even if everything else goes perfectly.