Some people like to talk about certain projects as a colossal “waste of money”  as if the dollars spent literally go into some hole in the ground, never to be seen again. I honestly do not have a specific, current government project in mind here. This is more along the lines of asking the potentially stupid question that I have harbored for a decade or more. 

If a government entity (or any private citizen for that matter) decides to take on a project and spend beaucoup bucks to construct a new building, stadium, or a new IT system…, that money will, in fact, be paid to some hard-working contractor, vendor, supplier, or other third-party provider.  The  perceived “wasted” dollars will go to the coffers of those business owners and their employees, to be used for food, shelter, and clothing of their families, and some beer I suppose.  Assuming those people are local citizens and businesses (or even just Americans), many of those dollars will come back in taxes and other spending, and all of the $ will keep flowing through the broader economy.  I know this isn’t a real in-depth analysis, but I think people forget that the money is simply redistributed – it does not disappear as the term “waste” and commentary surrounding such expenditures often implies.   

Now this in no way condones the current increase in the monetary supply by our federal government.  My musing here assumes a static amount of dollars in the system. And I do not have a political bent or any specific project in mind.  I’m simply suggesting that a project considered  to be “a complete waste of resources” really has a lot of positive economic impact as those dollars flow through the system and continue to be an active part of  the economy.  I would like to see a study of some major project from 10 years ago that tracked the dollars  paid from government coffers to see where those dollars flowed over the next decade.  I know  they did not get buried in the ground or burned up in a funeral pyre. Some of them may just be sitting in your wallet.

END