Obama Appeals to Congress for $50 Billion in Emergency Aid

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Sacamano
  • Start date Start date
we should keep handing out money to failed businesses and people that max out credit cards/sign for shit mortgages

they really learn from their mistakes
 
yeah, agreed - this would be good as a general (peacetime) measure, as long as the money was directed properly/etc. particularly when it comes to spending on public goods/goods with a large social benefit which are under provided by the private sector.



Agree on the deficits point.

The govt spending during wars could crowd out investment though. although the r&d part of it would be pretty good



again, fair point
 
living in the UK, it looks like we're going to be getting a dose of that pain you're talking about..
 
I agree with your statement that the peacetime deficit of the US is/was too high - however, I disagree with you if you are infering that this means the stimulus bill shouldn't have been enacted (I'm not sure if that's what you're saying). crowding out of investment will occur, yes, and the deficit will be a drag on the economy, but I think the current situation is preferable to one without any stimulus, where the US might still be in recession or experiencing much weaker growth (and still have a decently sized deficit due to peacetime spending).

basically, by the time the recession hit there's nothing the govt could do about peacetime spending, and a stimulus bill was still the right idea (I think). I also think it wasn't timed too badly.

I do agree that the stimulus bill could have been smaller, and with less 'useless'/pork barrel spending, and been more targeted, taking into account the high peacetime deficit - it may have been worth taking time and political capital to pull this off. (I say this without knowing much about the stimulus bill/what the core components were).

I agree that future investment will be crowded out as interest rates rise. but could you explain how current investment is crowded out? is it because of the debt raising the rate of borrowing at the moment and government expenditure 'filling gaps' that could be filled by the private sector?
 
i'm surprised obama won the elections and not someone from OT, i mean, we have so many better qualified people here for that job......
 
Yes government spending always has a crowding effect. But if the war is necessary in the long run 3, or 5 or 10 years later, after the war is over then society benefits by remaining free. But if society doesn't benefit or its a pointless war then the war jockies in DC would think twice before spending billions and raising taxes.
 
wouldnt it be awesome if obama actually showed proof on paper of a) why he thinks this is needed and b) where it will actually go instead of just saying "hay guyz we need mawney"
 
Nothing gets this president more fired up and pissed off than negative media attention Not massive unemployment, not an oil spill, not the middle east. But WATCH OUT if Fox News talks shit about him....he'll send in the goons!
 
didn't romney support always keeping a balanced budget? that sounds a bit to me. deficits are definitely necessary in some situations after all (recessions, transfering costs onto future generations for infrastructure, ..)
 
Obama being elected to office on his merits is equivalent to an OTer being elected president.

Seriously.
 
uh false. if it's a shock to aggregate demand in the economy, increasing the money supply can shift out aggregate demand, and counter the shock, assuming it's timed properly

however, it doesnt sound like obama's printing new money, just increasing govt expenditure. which does the same thing anyways
 
I'm not arguing against no stimulus, but the stimulus we received was primarily political paybacks to DNC doners who stuck it out for 6 years of incompetent republican rule.

Lots of red tape in the stimulus. Had I been president, I would have done a "stimulus" bill but it would have most likely been nothing but infrastructure investment. I would not have tried to dictate contract terms to the states and local governments involved (except for maybe some minimal build quality stipulations, states are free to enact their own most strict requirements), they know whats best for their areas. I would have made a simple infrastructure bill investing in roads/sewer/water lines and perhaps school construction projects. Items that generally pay themselves back many times over. We have an infrastructure deficit in this nation that will hit us hard between 2025 and 2040


edit: if we're in economic expansion we should be running a surplus and we should be building account surpluses (similar to what China has done) and we can tap these "savings" if you will during economic downturns and do serious infrastructure projects during 12 and 18 month downturns. This provides substantial benefits to society as a whole.
 
Back
Top