Oh no, the pods got me!

[isomeme]

I can't believe I'm about to write this, but I find myself agreeing with the Republicans on the stimulus package.  It's filled with funding which has no credible link to immediate economic stimulus.  I mean, sure, virtually any money the government spends will create jobs, but that argument is disingenuous.  Programs like alternative energy

Comments

THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THE CRISIS

[takwish]

Tax cuts! FOR THE RICH!!!

Re: THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE THE CRISIS

[isomeme]

Huh...you know, I suddenly realize that no rational, responsible person could possibly disagree with that assertion!

they're both stooge parrties

[krishnahermes]

Both parties are so filled with stooges that I don't see why we didn't get Iggy Pop instead of Obama.

[paradoxosalpha]

I can't see how the Federal government can "inject" a "stimulus" into the economy without funding specific programs, other than directly subsidizing the state governments (another feature of the majority stimulus package that some find objectionable). IANAE[conomist], but the ones I read that seem responsible and intelligent are emphasizing the need for government to spend deeply and diversely in order to offset the ongoing economic contraction

[isomeme]

I agree strongly that funding for programs such as alternative energy and rebuilding our cities for greater efficiency are critically important. I merely believe that these should be addressed in separate debates from the issue of immediate economic stimulus

[paradoxosalpha]

You seem to have cogently restated your original post without really responding to the points I raised. Wrt the one specific instance of spending on "alternative energy," it is not my impression that the funding is intended to be dedicated to primary research, as if "alternative" meant "alternative" to anything we know of now. Instead, the idea is to prime the industrialization and commercialization of competing known energy sources that have not been able to get a business toehold in the face of the inertia of our existing systems of production. Such an effort could create a wide variety of jobs, many of them requiring only very general skills that may have been developed in other lines of work

[isomeme]

David Brooks makes a good argument about the value of focus in this op-ed piece (though his "harmful to state governments" point is rather silly, I think). In brief, longer-term programs with effectively permanent effects are inherently (a) more complex and (b) more controversial than immediate, focused stimulus spending. Why rush into the former when this is guaranteed to create more partisan resistance, and also to result in poorly thought out initiatives being pushed into implementation?

We're metaphorically in the position of doctors treating a patient who suffers from both heart disease and a severed femoral artery. It seems unwise to spend time planning and implementing appropriate cholesterol control measures until we've stopped the bleeding.

*Blink* *Blink*

[fraterseraphino]

I didn't say anything.

Re: *Blink* *Blink*

[isomeme]

Hm? :)