But one old soldier, the debate about fiscal deficits, refuses to die. It's been lingering on, like Banquo's ghost or a bad smell. Take your pick.
Little wonder then that India's economists are once again angsting over whether or not there should - as suggested by the finance minister - be a "pause" in "fiscal consolidation". That is, the minister is asking if he can go on a spending spree.
Also Read
And well he might. After all, no one else with a legitimate income is willing to spend.
The consumer, thanks to very high taxation and persistently high food inflation, is constantly wondering how to make both ends meet. The government takes away half his income, the landlord a third, transport a fifth and school fees the rest. Poor guy.
The private corporate sector, meanwhile, is drowning in debt. With its nose just above the water, it can't spend on investment. In any case, if the consumer is not buying anything, why would firms want to invest more? What would they do with the increased output?
That leaves the old dear, the government, as the only source of spending. But thanks to a decade of Sonia Gandhi's bribing of voters with taxpayers' money (so that her vacuous son could become prime minister) the government is broke.
And it is going to be even more broke very soon. Why? Because it has to increase the pay and pensions of the millions of drones it currently employs and had employed in the past. Barring about 10 per cent, the rest of these people are the most useless part of the economy. They contribute nothing but take out a lot.
Then there are all those subsidies. Thanks to low oil prices these are coming down but not quickly enough because we always have an election around the corner and the subsidised public votes in large numbers. No subsidy, no vote.
Finally, there is the interest on past debt, incurred for the above two reasons. It has to be paid, no ifs and buts there. It's a question of being able to borrow in the future.
No one lends to welshers, least of all foreigners, on whom India is going to have to depend quite a bit for the next couple of years, if not three.
Modi's 2019 problem
Hence the finance minister's plaintive appeal: ek tho pause ho jaye? Some economists say no; others say yes.
But I think the government's mind is already made up because if Jaitley doesn't spend now, Modi will certainly lose the 2019 election. At present he is only certain of getting less than 282 seats.
This raises the question: How much will it matter for the economy if the fiscal deficit is higher than the announced target of 3.9 per cent of gross domestic product this year?
It depends on by how much. In turn, that assumes we know what a "safe" level of deficit is.
And there lies the nub: Just as everyone assumes that God exists, the majority of economists assume that the "safe" level is three per cent. Indeed, there is a Goebbelsian element to it. If you repeat something often enough even economists will start agreeing with each other.
Will a 4.9 per cent deficit matter very much if the money is well spent and not in the way Sonia Gandhi did, on bribing voters via MGNREGA etc? She won in 2009 because the Congress transferred almost Rs 6 lakh crore into rural pockets between April 2005 and March 2009.
The one per cent choice
You may well ask: What does well-spent mean? One way of spending well would be to rescue the public sector banks at one fell swoop but only after they have recovered about half of what they are owed. The State Bank of India can start with Vijay Mallya.
Another would be to give it to Nitin Gadkari. He says he will build roads and highways just as Keynes ordered.
The two are not mutually exclusive and both can be done and it need not be a 50:50 split. Personally, I would prefer to re-capitalise the banks. They can then start lending to consumers, if not to firms.
That, however, will not lead to quick results. So it looks as if Nitin bhaiyya is going to be leading the charge for demand revival, mainly of cement and steel. You can start buying those stocks, if you and your family can skip a meal every day or not pay exorbitant taxes.