I did.
Yet another non-economist spewing out ignorant opinions on macroeconomics, based on nothing but his personal microeconomic experience and anecdotal evidence.
Then the author going, "oooh listen to that guy, what he is saying must be true, I mean he is RICH after all".
The arguments presented are so crude and simplistic that even Krugman could point out flaws in them.
In fairness, the article is right about one thing: The indiscriminate spending it advocates would create jobs of SOME sort. But if the author had even a minimum of economic literacy he would know that indiscriminate job creation is not the POINT.
The point, and the big challenge of economic policy, is the creation of useful, productive jobs.
Speaking of crude and simplistic arguments, how do you like
"Rich people invest, and investment creates jobs."?
What is a useful, productive job then? If the jobs created by catering to the needs and wants of the people who happen to have extra cash to spend, as the example in the article, isn't good enough, then what is?