Amazing Stimulus
 

In a masterpiece of political will, the US congress passed an 1100 page document within 24 hours of its presentation. The ink was still wet on the paper when it was voted on. No one (i repeat) no one read the bill before it was voted on. In fact, to save the Republicans the trouble, the Democrats refused to even allow them to have a copy of the bill prior to the vote.

In a bill that will fundamentally change the relationship of the United States government to its citizens to a greater degree than any single piece of legislation since the Civil War, the bill forced down America's throat with unseemly haste. Once passed, President Obama waited from Friday until today to sign the measure though he state he would sign it even before it had passed. If there was that much time after the passage then what was the original hurry?

Sadly, many economists indicate that there is very little stimulus to be found in the measure despite obligating the US to spend several trillion dollars in new programs over the coming years.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

clearly it is part of a conspiracy.

perhaps obama is stealing your teeth old man

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

This is useless. For each Friedman, you'll find a Keynes.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

If a Republican stopped to help a cripple in the street, there'd be a Democrat pointing at the Republican telling everyone it was the Republican policies that crippled the man in the first place and the same would happen if the roles were reversed.

After five years here, I've realised there's no point in anyone asking for a "spirit of bi-partisanship" since there's simply no desire on either side for it to become a reality on anything more than a "feel-good" level.

Basically, US politics boils down "I disagree with whatever it is you're saying because I wear a blue hat and you wear a red one"

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

Although what dda says is partially true. Even to Keynesians (and I've been reading a lot of Paul Krugman lately) the stimulus package is a bit of a mess (and what Krugman passes over is that some dems are largely to blame). If it is to be a true stimulus package, it lacks the focus and amount of spending required to be truly successful. There should have been more thought put into the bill and while the republicans are right to demand accountability, their pretext for being opposed is entirely insane. In some respects their motives are undermining the only valuable part of their argument.

While the New Deal prevented the worst of the great depression, it arguably didn't solve the financial crisis until world war two came along with massive investment and consequential employment. This stimulus package is firmly in the New Deal category. If the US wants to seriously get itself out of this mess it needs to invest in new industries that will create new jobs. Because some jobs just aren't going to come back. If anything the more crazy and more ambitious the project the better - something like 100% renewable/nuclear energy within a decade, for example.

I prefer to think of stimulus packages in terms of what you want after the recession rather than all the economic monsters you want to stop. People should look to define 3 things that would benefit the economy as a whole and really focus the stimulus on them. Even if you didn't rejuvenate the economy as much as you wanted, you would at least be left with stuff that's actually useful to people. In some ways, depression 2.0 is a massive opportunity.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

Even if you believe any and all government spending stimulates the economy (and I could have sworn that even Keynesians were a bit particular in that regard), the stimulus bill has a long ramp-up time. Only a scant 8% of the money will be spent by the end of 2009 (41% by the end of 2010). Most of the money will be spent long after the recession (unless it turns out to be a really long recession).

I fail to see how money to be spent in the future can possibly help us out in the present, or why it was so damn urgent to get all that future spending allocated now.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

I was debating with myself the response i would give to your latest brand of idiocy. It seems I am oft times criticised for being harsh. I am harsh when I judge posts on the basis of what they contain. So instead I shall be kind and presume an underlying intelligence not evidenced by the text:

Governments do not create booms. They do not create recessions. They do not end booms and they do not end recessions.

Thus starting from a true basis we should ask the following:

During a recession, when a government finds it has money compared to everyone else, shouldn't a government spend that money?

We know that recessions will happen anyway. We know they will last as long as they will last. What on earth is the point of a government deciding to be the richest man on the titanic?

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

It's not like having more time to read will help you, when you can't read. Now, this is clearly a case of Obama trying to save someones *** from humiliation. Personally I think he takes the "trying to bring consensus to Washington" way to far, but hey.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

so true.


also the "Patriot Act" was pushed through in simular fashion.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

If you don't believe that governments can end recessions then perhaps you agree that calling this a 'stimulus' bill was, at best, misleading and thus there was no need to rush this bill through Congress with minimal consideration? That was pretty much my entire point.
Alas, our government doesn't actually have that money to spend. There's no money tree. Raising taxes is neither politically nor economically feasible at present, so all that's left is to borrow money which eventually will have to be repaid[*]. And as we're not likely to be running a budget surplus anytime soon, the debt will most likely have to be repaid by future generations. It may be that our need is so great that it justifies saddling our children with more debt (though I have yet to be convinced of that), but I see no reason to dress up such a horrible necessity as some sort of virtue.
I repeat: there is no money tree.

Irresponsible borrowing is what got us into this mess. I don't see how it's going to get us out of it.

[*]The debt could also be monetized via inflation, but as someone who lived through the Carter years I would regard that as the worst of all possible scenarios.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

They haven't taken them (yet) however, it appears they are in the process of putting a lien on the gold and silver dental work.

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

if you wear a tin foil hat it stops obama reading your thoughts!

Re: Amazing Stimulus
 

Sadly, we have been forced to turn in all our tin foil. Rom Emanuel's idea.