There's a big debate raging...

...in this country (and abroad) between the advocates of austerity on the one hand and those on the other who would rather pass a second (or third) stimulus in order to avoid a double-dip recession. (This is why Harry Truman once wished for a one-armed economist.)

So who's right? How the heck should I know.

Republicans argue that last year's stimulus package was a waste of money. The unemployment rate ended up soaring well past the 8% mark that the Obama administration warned against. Economists like Paul Krugman, however, argue that the stimulus wasn't large enough in the first place and that a second one of comparable size may be necessary.

Again, who's right? Again, I don't know.

In fact, the more I listen to the arguments, the more confused I get:

Bush cut taxes in 2001 and the economy floundered anyway. Yeah, but imagine how much weaker it would have been otherwise.

Reagan cut taxes in 1981 and the economy flourished. But not until after the budget deal in '82, which raised taxes.

Kennedy cut taxes in '61 and the market soared. (Republicans especially love this one.)

Hoover tried to balance the budget after the Crash of '29 and the economy deteriorated further. FDR came into office pledging to balance the budget in order to save the economy, but then created the New Deal and the economy recovered. After trying to balance the budget again in '37, the Depression went into a double-dip. It was only after the country's factories began to gear up for war in '39 or so that the economy finally recovered. "No, no, no," say Republicans. It was the wasteful spending of the New Deal that prolonged the Great Depression.

Have a migraine yet? I do.

Economists will argue endlessly about which government policy caused the economy to do whatever it did.

But maybe everyone here is wrong. Maybe, just maybe, the economy moves in cycles -- both large and small -- that are completely out of our control.

Like the rooster above and the rising sun, maybe the economy does whatever it does regardless of what we try to do to influence it. After all, the sun doesn't rise because the rooster crows; the rooster crows because the sun rises.