Second, even if some of the spending is going to occur outside of the 18 month time frame, well, that still might be relevant; see this post.
Timing (II): Spending will occur in the future, even after the long downturn (here is a passionate statement of that argument ).
This “neo-Ricardian equivalence” (not that Ricardo actually believed in it) makes some sense, although to my knowledge no empirical studies support it holding in full.
Now, there are plenty of other, more reasonable, critiques that pertain to the degree of efficacy (how big the multiplier is, whether the spending will occur in time, etc.): Timing (I): That is the argument (not yet proved) that much of the spending in this bill will occur not within the next 18 months .
I would say that a “backwards-L” shaped aggregate supply curve is a little implausible in the medium run (and is not standard in most macro textbooks).
This argument seems to be based on this CBO computer run of a component of an earlier proposal, not the current plan (see Dean Baker).
Hence, one needs to await an assessment of the current proposal before one can jump in.
Accommodation is where you live or stay, especially when you are on holiday or when you are staying somewhere for a short amount of time.
In British English, accommodation is an uncountable noun.
So one might as well undertake the fiscal stimulus. Case 4 (no need to do anything — we’re already doing as well as we can): Output is at full employment levels.