Science should be immune to infection by money, arrogance or politics, but the dismal science has suffered a lot, especially in macroeconomics. Not to say that its evolution was not important, but we are far from an appeasing solution that will assist us in unconventional situations. However, history shows us that in extreme circumstances, such as the one we now face, we evolved on the back of ideas, innovations and advances, seeing alternatives and proposals, sometimes counterintuitive, but with great practical effects. This is a time when the (macro) economy needs to evolve.
Among the various existing models, the ones that always come to the fore are the Hicks-Hansen Model (or IS-LM Keynesian Model) and the Classical Model which, albeit old, present various positions as to its premises and serve as parameters for our argument. On the one hand, the Keynesian, in need of state intervention and, on the other, the Classics, assuming the fundamental assumption that if the idle factors of production are left to adjust, they will always produce the best results.