Open Thread on the "Stimulus"

[The Tim]

Of course, I should point out that it doesn't really matter anyway. I'm sure this is going to be shoved through just like TARP was.

[biliruben]

[jon]

These stories of worst crash since XXXX sound an awful lot like the baby incubators of Kuwait and the chemical weapons stockpiles of Iraq. More stories to sell newspapers and push through earmarks.

And while the money will mostly be spent in 2 short years, the debt will be piled up and compounding for many decades while we have to pay increased taxes while buying products at inflated prices.

Most of the stimulus bill seems to be extra entitlements that will never be reduced. I am surprised I haven't seen pictures of how the spending is broken down by type. Just anecdotes of this and that. It is almost like no one has any real idea of what is being rushed through by a President who has never held a real job in his life.

[biliruben]

[The Tim]

[biliruben]

Cato is generally anti-government intervention. It ain't a shock that they disagree with government intervention. They wouldn't be non-partisan if libertarians had more than a handful of viable candidates.

What education and health care changes are you referring to? Upgrading Schools? Providing healthcare for kids?

[The Tim]

[sniglet]

[biliruben]

I generally only give significant credence to economists that that had some inkling that the crash was coming; Roubini, CR, The Economist, Krugman, MISH (who's in sniglet's camp), angry bear and the like. The vast majority think deflation and depression are a strong possibility.

I don't recall Cato or Tyler Cowen or any other libertarian who was pleading for more intervention and regulation of the mortgage and banking industry. They therefore deserve only my scorn, and I discount them out of hand. Libertarians occasionally have some good ideas, particularly on the social side, but their economics suck beans, imho.

[biliruben]

Tim - I read the relatively small provisions he put in this bill as either strongly related to jobs or infrastructure or both, and relatively uncontroversial. It's not like he's trying to jam universal health care in there (I can dream).

What in there do you disagree with?

[The Tim]

[Charles Dean]

Here is the thing though, is that if you don't cram it all into one bill and make a dramatic move, you then end up having 10-12 bills that take months in committees to move to the floor, then there's also much more pork added to each one.

The other thing is that if you make it one large package, then there are usually enough positive things in it that it is much more likely to pass. If an individual senator is happy with say, 70%, then the 30% they don't like is treasured by another senator. Then you end up debating everything on a micro level when we have a macro problem.

I would venture to guess that if you did a dozen different small bills it would cost us far more and it would also take 6 months to get them all passed. If that quickly even.

[deejayoh]

[jon]

[biliruben]

We've had over 2 trillion in tax-cuts over the last 8 years, and it's led us to the brink of disaster, with no cushion to soften to blow.

Anyone who claims more of the same is the solution, has to explain why tax cuts were an appalling failure so far, but will work in the future. Otherwise I take their recommendation as already proven to fail.