If you don't know what you are talking about, don't. Go to bloomberg, Barrons, Investors Business Daily, Forbes, etc. and find out how much money is sitting on the sidelines.<quoted text>
"Sitting on cash??" Literally?
What exactly do you envision "sitting on cash" means, that makes your blaming behavior assertion that there are bazillions "not being invested" true? You do recognize, of course, that money on deposit in ANY form of interest-bearing account IS INVESTED, and supports lending to middle-class consumers and businesses by that deposit-taking institution in amounts greater than the amount on deposit, yes?
As for "too much uncertainty," you are absolutely correct - and the large negative reaction of markets worldwide to the rubes' re-election of the amateur Incompetent-in-Chief shows clearly the main reason for this uncertainty and pessimism.
NO ONE owes it to your statist heroes in Washington to put scarce and hard-won savings at risk just to make them look other than the prosperity-killing progressive eejits they are.
Elections have consequences. You and your fellow class warriors voted for 4 more years of the same disastrous economic decline and the same bunch of leftists who will have us slouching further down the Euro-socialist road to Greece-like ruin. The smart money (and outside of government there's only smart money) has gone to ground - and is going to stay there. So quit whining - you're getting exactly what you voted for.
Over $2 Trillion is scarce? REALLY?
My point remains and still stands, taxing money sitting on the sideline does no harm to the economy. On the other hand, cutting food stamps to reduce spending will have an immediate impact on the grocery business.