Bring on the pork ...

[8ballrollin]

Maybe the Rs can regain their mission as an effective opposition party; they do effectively and I hope we see more of it.

To answer your question Tex, yes, much of it is crap. If you support a stimulus bill...that's great. There are coherent arguments that government-created demand can stimulate the economy and bridge the gap the market cannot cover. But if you favor a stimulus, shouldn't the money be spent on stimulus and not on social programs already funded under the general budget or dream land initiatives?

The spending in this bill is no joke; it's nearly half of what the Iraq war has cost to date.

The price tag on the items Tex list above is about $19.6B. Dropping these items is not even 2.3% of the total bill ($885B).

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I was using the term "legit" in the sense of "legitimate stimulus expenses." I guess we'd have to know more specifics to define exactly how legitimate they are in the broader sense of Washington spending, but regardless, this is not stimulus. This is pork.

Or perhaps you'd like to make the case for how $125m for Washington sewers stimulates the economy.

?

Why would you take the position that none of the items above "stimulate" the economy? Are you under the impression that paying for improvements to water and sewer treatment, for example, goes into a big black hole that nobody benefits from?

There are a few theories on how to stimulate the economy. One theory is that you spend as much as possible, in diverse sectors of the economy, to lift multiple sectors rather than just one. Water and sewer plants hire people. Construction work requires people doing jobs. Those people get money rather than get laid off. You may argue it isn't the BEST way to stimulate the economy (debatable, and nobody really knows), but it is totally absurd to argue it has no effect on the economy at all. Spending of this amount will have an effect. The debate ought to be whether it is the most efficient way of attaining the desired result rather than whether there is any effect at all.

[MikeWaters]

Dramatically increasing pay for guys who build roads, and increasing their numbers, is going to give America an edge that other nations will be sorely jealous of.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Dramatically increasing pay for guys who build roads, and increasing their numbers, is going to give America an edge that other nations will be sorely jealous of.

Keynesian economics, my friend. That is what dug us out of the Great Depression (view WWII as a gigantic spending project of the government, along with all of FDR's programs).

As I mentioned, the idea is to lift multiple sectors of the economy, not just one. That is why there is a lot of spending for R&D as well.

Again, whether or not this bill makes sense is one debate, but Tex's statement that none of the spending he listed does anything to stimulate the economy reflects a deep lack of understanding of economics.

[MikeWaters]

I'm sure the massive delays due to highway and street construction will do wonders for the economy.

One thing is for sure: the Mob will clean house.

[8ballrollin]

President Obama's top economic adviser last summer...

"poorly provided fiscal stimulus can have worse side effects than the disease that is to be cured." So his proposal had three clear guidelines.

"First, the stimulus should be timely. The money should go out “almost immediately.” Second, it should be targeted. It should help low- and middle-income people. Third, it should be temporary. Stimulus measures should not raise the deficits “beyond a short horizon of a year or at most two.

Long-term social investment programs shouldn't be part of a stimulus bill.

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Keynesian economics, my friend. That is what dug us out of the Great Depression (view WWII as a gigantic spending project of the government, along with all of FDR's programs)

The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression. And if we're going to bring up the '30s, why is the WH supporting Buy American provisions in the bill? Do they know the history of the Depression?

[MikeWaters]

Why doesn't the govt. buy a million cars from GM / Chrysler / Ford and have Oprah give them away, one at a time?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Keynesian economics, my friend. That is what dug us out of the Great Depression (view WWII as a gigantic spending project of the government, along with all of FDR's programs).

As I mentioned, the idea is to lift multiple sectors of the economy, not just one. That is why there is a lot of spending for R&D as well.

Again, whether or not this bill makes sense is one debate, but Tex's statement that none of the spending he listed does anything to stimulate the economy reflects a deep lack of understanding of economics.

How cute. There's still a few people left who think the New Deal ended the Great Depression. That little War in the 40's ... all part of FDR's grand economic plan.

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Keynesian economics, my friend.

John Maynard Keynes

Organized public works, at home and abroad, may be the right cure for a chronic tendency to a deficiency of effective demand. But they are not capable of sufficiently rapid organization (and above all cannot be reversed or undone at a later date), to be the most serviceable instrument for the prevention of the trade cycle.

I think legitimate arguments for fiscal stimulus can be made. It seems we need both fiscal and monitory policy right now. But once spending on new bureaucracy begins, it can never be deflated. Two years out, any newly created bureaucracy or inflated agencies will need another funding source.

If the WH wants to underwrite a generation of social programs it should be done in a different bill.