More broken windows . . .

Of course, the idea that the broken window created a flurry of economic activity is neither new nor particularly original.  One hears the same thing about wars -- "WWII pulled us out of the Great Depression" -- and about natural disasters -- "Hurricane Andrew created thousands of jobs in Homestead, Florida."

The problem with such reasoning is this: it is true that the broken window made our guy spend money with the glass dude, who could then buy a TV, who could . . .  But here's what's often ignored: what might the first guy have done with his money if he didn't have to spend it on a new window? Perhaps he would have spent it on a flat panel television. Or perhaps he would have put it in the bank, where someone could have borrowed it to buy a new car. Either of these actions would have touched off just as much spending as the broken window did.

The point is that in the first case, we get a lot of spending. But in the second case, we get exactly the same amount of spending and we save ourselves a broken window. WWII was indeed a great thing for the American economy, unless, of course you count the half-million people who died and all of the tanks, jeeps, ships, and planes that were destroyed in the process.  And those jobs in Homestead were jobs created simply to replace what had been destroyed, not to create anything new.

When we evaluate the impact of an event, it is not right, accurate, or fair for us to look only at the benefits, we must also look at the costs.