| NY Mag. | 0 | |
| Wash Wire | 0 | |
| NYT | 0 | |
| WaPo | Calif. insurer’s rate increases draw attention of federal government |
0 |
| Red State | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Spinsational:
"We were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values."
-Obama, explaining recent Democrat losses, 1/20/10
Velvet Lair- The sexiness of winning the battle of good versus evil January 26, 2010
- Ever wonder why? January 12, 2010
- The decision to bench Peyton Manning: Right or wrong? December 28, 2009
- Is my dad turning into a metrosexual? November 24, 2009
- My “Things To Do For Christmas” list November 23, 2009
Should there even be an economic stimulus package?
With all the talk out there, mainly from the Democrat side, saying we need to “do something and do it now” as it relates to our troubled economy, it appears inevitable that indeed “something” will happen. But in the rush to get something passed, and with Obama’s telling the GOP that, regarding the stimulus they need to “not play politics” (read: don’t continue to object to anything we put in it, because we’ve already placated you enough and we need to pass it now), isn’t it long past time that Washington, DC slow the hell down, read the fine print and really debate whether or not this is really necessary? Heck, some Democrats are saying that the current plan isn’t enough! Insanity.
The Politico has an article up today which talks about and quotes some of the skeptics of “doing something right now.” Michelle Malkin’s done a kick a** job on sounding the alarm bells about the stimulus plan for weeks now. ST readers Dana and GWR noted their objections to it last night. First, Dana:
Am I the only one who thinks that maybe the best thing the government can do for the economy is to do nothing at all?
The economy will recover, because the economy always recovers; that’s just part of the business cycle. But President Obama would add spending programs that would push the deficits to above a trillion dollars a year, far as far as the eye can see. That can’t be good.
GWR:
No, you’re not, Dana.
Before the government can spend a dime, it has to get the money, since government produces no wealth. There are only three ways to get it.
They can get it through taxes, which means the private sector has less money for business, saving, etc….which leads to less business for the local supermarkets, computer stores, etc. That doesn’t help the economy.
They can run the printing presses and inflate the currency. That immediately lowers everyone’s standard of living as prices move upward to compensate for the devalued dollar. In the extreme case, you get Zimbabwe.
Or they can borrow the money, which always catches up with governments eventually, leading to a combination of the previous two cases.
There’s a reason free markets and the business cycle go hand-in-hand with prosperity and liberty.
Yep.
What do you think?
Related: Add another voice of sanity to the argument against this bill: Jeffrey Sachs writes about how he feels that [t]he stimulus is a fiscal straitjacket (via Memeo).
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
11 Responses to “Should there even be an economic stimulus package?”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
That first guy you quoted, he’s some kinda brilliant!
President Roosevelt felt that he had to “do something” about the Depression, and we stayed in the Depression until we had a stimulus package passed by Hideki Tojo and Adolf Hitler. I’m guessing that’s not really the way we ought to do things this time.
You raise some excellent points and put to paper some thoughts of my own. Well done.
In my opinion, let the markets take care of themselves. This is not a cold expression. In fact, if the banks and money markets were left to deal with the mess they made, they would have done so most efficiently.
If you have a business and your clients/customers can’t pay, you work with your client/customer so as not to lose it all. BANKS WOULD HAVE BAILED OUT CONSUMERS BY LOWERING INTEREST RATES AND PROFIT MARGINS THEMSELVES.
The same can be said for credit. Banks cannot exist without lending money- that is how they make money. Sooner or later banks have to lend money. Now, because of the initial bailout funds, it becomes clear that bonuses. perks and payouts took precedence over the banks clients and customers. That unsophisticated credit union is beginning to look a whole lot better, isn’t it?
Funding the bailout only excuses the bad investment decisions made by pension funds and investment funds. If the pension and investment funds want to retain their investors, they could lower their fees and/or profit margins.
You get the idea.
When all is said and done, the best investment and stimulus package we can put together is to build and repair/rebuild our national, state, county and local infrastructures. Instead of leaving our kids more debt, let’s leave them greater opportunities and the infrastructure backbone to make their efforts easier.
When you look at the details of this package it is not ’stimulus’ in any way shape or form. It’s just a plain old bloated spending bill. But the Dems stamp it with the ’stimulus’ tag and somehow it gets through as ‘needed for the economy.’ Since when has ANY spending bill done anything but create a bigger deficit or a need for higher taxes?
Unbelievable.
Every day I log on to Michelle Malkin’s blog to see the new line items. ATV trails. Resodding the Mall in D.C. STD prevention. Just makes me sick.
What’s in the stimulus package hardly matters. The whole thing is psychological. It’s a Hitchcock “Maguffin” (the thing that sets the plot in motion–doesn’t matter what it is as long as people want it).
We’re hearing much (probably too much) these days about how FDR didn’t really end the Depression, and that it was World War II that finally did. Doesn’t matter. The people perceived that FDR was “doing something” and went along.
When the package passes, the markets will rise, people will sing “Happy Days Are Here Again,” wine will flow, car adverts will reappear on your TV screen, and we shall dance.
And the deficit will be worse.
Ooops. Typo in my Fitzgerald quote. There should be a new paragraph beginning at “So we beat on.”
Sorry, Scott.
i think we should cut out all of this income tax returns and all the other checks to people and just set a 15% fee to everyone for our taxes no refunds the gov would make more money and that would be fair to everyone.
I think this country is in big trouble.
all repubs against
a few dems against
sell this! do it this way..
BIPARTISAN OPPOSITION TO STIMULUS PLAN!
FYI, all – new post on the stimulus bill passing in the House here.