When it comes to the ‘worst’ news: The ‘worst news’ is bad, but the ‘best’ is…

In the past two years, news coverage on the economy has become so toxic that it’s become harder and harder for even the most diehard economists to agree on what the best thing to do is, a new study finds.

The consensus is to cut spending, raise taxes, and increase government spending to try to bring about a rebound in the economy.

The problem is that even if that rebound is to happen, there’s no evidence it will be sustainable.

The authors of the study, a group of economists at Harvard University, said that despite the consensus that there is no such thing as the “best” thing to cut or raise taxes or cut spending on, the consensus still holds that there are some things that are bad news.

Here are their conclusions:1.

Spending cuts will hurt the economy and people are likely to feel that.

That’s because cutting spending leads to a reduction in demand and thus an increase in unemployment.

It also leads to job losses and joblessness, and that’s bad news for people and businesses alike.2.

Raising taxes and spending will hurt growth and jobs, because raising taxes leads to higher government spending and thus lower economic growth.

That will cause economic turmoil and unemployment.

The study also finds that cutting spending and raising taxes will cause more unemployment.


The government’s response will be to raise taxes.

That is bad news, because the more people feel that they need to raise their taxes to pay for their deficit, the less likely they are to feel like they need government intervention to deal with their problems.

That makes a bad situation worse.4.

Raises in the federal deficit will cause the economy to shrink faster than it would if government spending were cut.

This is bad for the economy because it’s bad for growth and employment, and it means the federal government is more likely to borrow and spend when its budgets are tight.5.

Raised taxes and higher spending will make the economy worse.

Raise taxes and spend less, and the economy will be hurt because people will feel like the government owes them money for things they can’t do themselves, like paying their bills or paying their taxes.

This will cause higher unemployment and lower economic activity, which will cause even more unemployment and economic instability.


The recovery will be slower and weaker.

The new study shows that the recovery is likely to be weaker than it otherwise would be, with the economy growing at less than 2 percent a year, and unemployment rates falling.

It’s also likely to lag behind other recoveries.7.

There is a tradeoff between lower economic recovery and increased unemployment.

If we have higher unemployment than we otherwise would, there will be less growth, so we will be spending more to get out of recession.

This would mean more economic instability and higher unemployment.

But it would also mean that the federal debt would be lower, because that would make the deficit less and the federal tax burden lower.8.

The recession is likely worse than it is now, so the Federal Reserve will not increase interest rates to stimulate the economy or stimulate the recovery.

But, since there’s not much chance of that happening, it will take a lot more money to slow the economy down.9.

The economy has been growing faster than expected and is on track to grow faster than any other major economy in history.

This has led to a strong stock market rally, with many economists predicting that stocks will start to rise soon after the report.

But even if the stock market rises at a faster rate than the economy, it could take longer for the recovery to take hold, and if it does take longer, it’s likely to lead to higher unemployment rates.


How bad is the recovery?

Economists agree that the best response to the recession is to raise spending, increase taxes, or both.

That sounds like the best outcome, but economists disagree about how to achieve that.

The Federal Reserve raised interest rates twice in the past few years to try and help stimulate the financial markets and stimulate the stock and bond markets, but there is little evidence that it has done anything more than that.

In addition, the recovery has been weak and slow, and some economists believe that it could actually slow down.


How much of a problem is it?

In the wake of the Great Recession, the U.S. economy contracted by almost $1 trillion, and jobs were lost by more than 20 million jobs.

If this was just a small recession, the economy would have recovered by now, and there would be no reason for the Federal Government to spend more to try again.


What should policymakers do?

One option would be to spend less money and more time doing things like helping people buy homes and businesses invest in their future, rather than spending more money and time on trying to slow down the economy’s recovery.

More generally, policymakers should do what economists call “stricter fiscal policy.”