Personally, I don't disagree with Krugman that tight fiscal policy is not the answer. It isn't. Similarly, no one would dispute that there was some growth in FDR's 1935-36 period, as there was in the mid-1990s in Japan.
Here's the problem - very little of that growth was privately financed - nearly all was public. It would not sustain itself without the continued pumping of money. Heck, during the Great Depression, what exactly was that growth? Very little. Unemployment? Didn't move much outside of government-created jobs.
So... all of the government employed people spent their money on what, the tolls for government-repaired bridges?
How do you know things wouldn't have been far worse without it?
