I have an assignment to analyze an essay using economic theories and concepts. I also have some information already for it and i just want help to build on my work.

Radical economic policies are working and show a future path By Linda McQuaig Contributing Columnist Wed., June 3, 2020timer3 min. read \"Nobody told us we could do that!\" exclaimed a startled British commentator when Britain suddenly abandoned the gold standard in the depths of the 1930s Depression. The move came as a shock because everyone had assumed the gold standard an international agreement linking currency rates to gold was an immutable law of nature, along with much else about the economy. And then, just like that, it was gone. That sense of shock is probably not unlike what many people are feeling today as all our long-held assumptions about how the economy works and what is and isn't possible suddenly seem no more certain than when we'll be able to get our next tattoo. For years, we've submitted to the economic orthodoxy dictated by Bay Street: that governments must deliver balanced budgets and low spending or economic disaster will follow as surely as gravity will bring a heavy object plunging to the ground. Then along came the pandemic. Suddenly the Bank of Canada is creating vast amounts of money, which the federal government is distributing to Canadians across the country. Nobody told us we could do that! In fact, it's just what's needed. To prevent an economic collapse, our central bank is buying $5 billion a week in government bonds, which is effectively creating money out of thin air. Private banks do this all the time; they effectively create money whenever they issue a loan. It's one of the reasons banking is such a lucrative business. Now, the Bank of Canada is creating enormous sums of money to help pay for the federal government's huge increase in spending during the pandemic. Bay Street financial interests are grudgingly accepting this, given the emergency, but they want it to stop as soon as possible. But wait! Not so fast! Now that we see how it can be done, one is tempted to ask: could this be a way to pay for increased government spending on future things we truly need like building hospitals and public transit and investing in renewable energy? This is the sort of dangerous thinking that a phalanx of powerful interests from the Fraser Institute to the financial press are keen to crush, realizing it could spread more easily than coronavirus at a crowded, maskless beach party. But, as economist Jim Stanford suggests, \"the genie is out of the bottle.\" Bay Street is determined to return to low government spending and to ensure that the recovery focuses, not on new aspirations, but on restoring the corporate world so that it's as rich and dominant as it was before the crisis. As the Fraser Institute's Jason Clemens insists, the priority must be on tamping down government intervention and encouraging entrepreneurial innovation, while avoiding tax hikes. In other words, resurrecting the old orthodoxy and making sure the rich aren't asked to pay a penny more. This is exactly what financial interests urged during the 1930s Depression and it only prolonged the downturn. The brilliant British economist John Maynard Keynes pointed out at the time that private enterprise wasn't investing during the Depression because, with everyone out of work, there was little prospect of making a profit. He argued that the only solution was for government to step in and spend massively on needed projects. \"We have the savings, the men and the material,\" he declared. \"The things are worth doing.\" Keynes said that putting people back to work would create productive capacity the very source of wealth: \"It is utterly imbecile to say that we cannot afford these things. For it is with the unemployed men and the unemployed plant, and with nothing else, that these things are done.\" Keynes' point was proved when U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt's vast government spending on New Deal projects put millions of Americans back to work building roads and power plants, and helped kick-start the recovery. Roosevelt also defied economic orthodoxy by dramatically raising taxes on the rich. Certainly, today, nobody is telling us we can do that! But then, under the new reality of the pandemic, that looks like another bit of economic orthodoxy that now seems so 24 hours ago. Linda McQuaig is a freelance contributing columnist for the Star and author of \"The Sport & Prey of Capitalists.\" SHARE: -Money Supplier Money supply in a country is the total amount of cash or demand deposits that are as liquid as cash. The supply of money is controlled by central banks. The point in the article "Suddenly the Bank of Canada is creating vast amounts of money, which the federal government is distributing to Canadians across the country" states that the Central bank of Canada has increased the money supply in the economy. The point in the article "central bank is buying $5 billion a week in government bonds" means central bank is infusing liquidity in the economy by buying the government bonds and giving cash in exchange. This increases the money supply in the economy. Central bank is the money supplier. -Money Multiplier The banks work with the process of fractional reserve banking which enables money multiplying effect. The point in the article "Private banks do this all the time; they effectively create money whenever they issue a loan" means that the banks are using the process of fractional reserve banking and this creates money in the economy. Each bank has to hold a certain percentage of each deposit as reserve and the rest it can lend out. The money it lends out is the money that the bank effectively creates. Suppose the reserve ratio is 10%. Money multiplier = 1 / Reserve ratio = 1 / 0.10 = 10 So a deposit of $1000 would create money worth $10,000 trough fractional reserve banking & Money Multiplier. -SPRA Special purchase and resale aggrement. When central bank wishes to increase the money supply in the economy for a short period, then it uses SPRA. It purchases securities from the bank, thus infusing money in the economy and then also specified a resale of the securities to the bank at the same time, thus taking the liquidity out at a later date. -SRAS Short run aggregate supply. This is the curve that shows positive relation between the price level and the goods and services supplied in the economy. At higher price level, the suppliers would be motivated to supply more. Thus a positive relation. -Overnight rate Each bank has to fulfill the reserve requirements every day that are set by the central bank. But sometimes banks fall short, so they borrow from other banks for one night just to fulfill the reserve requirements. This borrowing is done at overnight rate. -Bank rate It is the rate at which the central bank provides loans to the commercial banks. -Keynesian transaction motive. Keynes gave three motives for which money is demanded. One of the three is transaction motive. People demand money to carry out everyday transactions, i.e to be able to buy goods and services in the economy. As incomes increase, the demand of money for transaction motive also increases. -Speculative motives Keynes gave three motives for which money is demanded. One of the three is speculative motive. When interest rates are high, demand for cash (real money balances) is low as people wish to keep money in banks and enjoy high returns or when interest rates are high, people expect that interest rates would fall and so price of the bonds would go up so they invest in bonds. When interest rates are low, demand for cash is high as banks are providing less interests rates and people expect interest rates to go up and thus bond prices would fall down, they do not invest in bonds also