If you ignore interest expense volatility

Brad claims that DC can borrow some unlimited funds in the current situation, and have a multiplier greater than one.

 That is wrong as we see the interest exspenses vary for Congress by 100 billion over the course of a year. n That represents a half point swing i  fun ds flow just to cover the varying interest costs of DC.  We can see, right here on  this chart, that interest expense volatility starts around 2004, before the crash and gets nothing but worse during the recovery.

Congress cannot budget with that kin d of budget instability, hey have n o direct control over it, and they no longer have he discretionary spending to cover the volatility.  Put another way, as soon as interest expenses start to move, the linearity in  Brad's model goes to shit and tells us nothing.  Brad started with the left proposition, then  scraped up a short linear sequence some where and called it proof.  That is absolute fraud by a UC economics professor, on the taxpayers dime.

Why so volatile?

On e, a reliance on wealth taxes, which are cpital gains dependent.  And two, roll over interference. Treasury is dealing with the money they borrowed six years ago, and run  ing Bush's pile through at the same time.  Meanwhile major tax and program changes add even more volatility because many of those kick in  at the end of presidential regime.

So, does debt raise rates at the moment?

The trick here is the impossibility proof.  Congress can borrow what it wants, and the mere existence of Congress means rate have to be damn low for them to get a budget.  Remember, a period where the ten year goes to 3.5% means those interest expenses go from  460 billion to 700 billion, a huge hole in  the budget.  Congress would collapse, and the dollar replaced by the virtual coins.