Warning: Political Rant!!

[davidbcoe]

Are they really this stupid?  Is that even possible?  Does Republican Senator John Thune of South Dakota not realize that in rehabilitating ATV and recreational trails in national monuments and parks we are creating necessary work for people who have no jobs?  Does Republican Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas not understand that in renovating

Comments

[davidbcoe]

First of all, Jagi, thank you so much for your thoughtful, reasoned reply to my comments (which were somewhat less thoughtful and reasoned, and far more emotional. Fun to write, but perhaps not as constructive an addition to the discussion...) I agree with some of what you've said here; I disagree with far more of it. But I do believe that there are those on the right who have given careful thought to these issues and come out with an opinion diametrically opposed to mine. I respect their integrity.

I don't believe that Sam Brownback, John Thune, and John McCain fall into the category of "thoughtful critics". I believe they were and are looking to score politically.

Taking on your friend, Fred: as a student of New Deal Era history I fundamentally disagree with his interpretation of what happened during the Great Depression (as does Paul Krugman http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/opinion/10krugman.html). The problem wasn't too many public works programs and too much spending, it was too little. The Depression was easing until 1937-38 when a combination of factors -- court decisions striking down key components of the New Deal and FDR's own decision to cut back on spending and raise taxes, sent the economy back into a tailspin. It took WWII to really pull us out of the Depression.

There are so many problems with our economy right now that there can certainly be reasonable disagreement as to which to tackle first. But most would point to the liquidity problem caused by frightened banks and the lack of consumer spending. What the economy needs is a jolt of cash -- some in the form of tax cuts to be sure, but almost all economists agree that actual infrastructure expenditures pump more money into the economy than tax cuts. The problem is that many of those infrastructure projects are planning intensive and thus aren't "shovel-ready". That's where the projects I mention at the top of my post come in. They get people working again quickly, which gives them money to spend, which allows them to prime the pump by finally getting that new car they need or the new electronics they want.

In any case, this is a discussion that could go on and on without either "Fred" or me giving an inch. I do agree that we need longer term investments in the bill as well, some in the form of targeted tax breaks to small businesses that will create jobs down the road and some in the form of equally targeted breaks for big businesses to help them retool for the Green Economy we so desperately need.

But things like the expenditure for hybrid vehicles for the government seems to be a no-brainer. Buying the cars puts money right into the market, helps an industry that is in terrible shape, AND solves energy/pollution problems. That John McCain of all people would come out against that just proved to me that these Congressional attacks were political and not sincere. That's part of what I was responding to. That, and Harry Reid's notable lack of cajones...

[arhyalon]

You are welcome, David, and thanks for your thoughtful answer in returnt.

My point was not that Fred and his views -- on today or the past -- is correct, so much as that Fred is thoughtful. I just feel it is easier to live in a world where we appreciate the thoughfullness of our opponents than one where we feel their actions are selfish. It feels less arbitrary.

But it may well be that you and Fred would both agree on something -- and that is that you don't agree with McCain and Co.. From the various "Freds" I know, I don't hear them approving of those fellows either. ;-)

[carolf]

Good exchange, both of you!

I have two big problems with the Freds of the US right now.

1) Their arguments, well reasoned as they are, all lean to the supply-side of economics. Ever since Reagan, that's been the be-all and end-all of Conservative economics.

Problem is, supply is not our problem. As a country we've been growing our production efficiency at an accelerating rate. Supply, we've got. What we lack is Demand. (Ask anyone who's trying to sell a house, right now.)

That's why, when the demand is lacking, the Mt Rushmore projects work better than the small business project. The small business model does produce some jobs -- but it also gives money to the shareholders. The Reaganomics model assumes the shareholders will invest in more businesses, creating new jobs. However, that takes much, much time and so doesn't help now. More importantly, Reaganomics assumed a closed system. As Friedman says, the world is flat, economically speaking. The jobs created aren't here -- they're in Sri Lanka or Vietnam or China.

2. None of the projects I've seen mentioned are of the Mt. Rushmore model. Some are meant for immediate infrastructure repair (shovel ready), some for intermediate infrastructure (schools, for example) and some for long-term investment into the infrastructure we'll need going down the road (green industries et al.) Small businesses do not repair the roads they use. Small businesses don't have the resources to invest in, say, high-speed trains, and large businesses, beholden to their stockholders, do not.

The reasoned arguments from the Freds have been followed in this country, now, since Reagan. (Clinton didn't have a Congress to do much else.) No matter what happens, Fred keeps saying the same thing.

At some point, I'd like to hear Fred tell me when he thinks we might need a demand stimulus.

In short (too late!) Fred keeps reasonably arguing a solution for a different problem than the one we have.

[davidbcoe]

I agree with you, Carol. (Not surprising, I know.) The point of the stimulus is to prime the pump, get things moving again, put just a little bit more money in people's pockets so that they'll start to spend again. The supply-siders don't get that done.