 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
     |
 |
49°
Partly Cloudy | 10MPH
NEWSROOM * CIRCULATION * ADVERTISING
Friday
March 2010
19
Community Blogs
Bill was a resident of Germantown for about 20 years and now resides in Richfield with his wife and 2 children. Traveling is a favorite activity of Bill's family but they are always happy to come back home. The whole family are avid Packer/Brewer/Bucks fans. You'll never know what you'll find on his blog since he likes to talk about any and all topics. Bill currently works for RE/MAX Realty 100 as a Realtor. During the summer, Bill works at Charter Raceway Park as an announcer and in concessions at Miller Park.
Stimulus or Wasteful Spending?
Where do I begin? It sure sounds to me like the government isn't really thinking through this "stimulus" package. And I don't mean just the Democrats. I heard a comment by one of the politicians (I believe it was a Republican) sometime over the last several days that the American public wants them to cross aisles and work together so they need to get this done. What??!! I thought the idea was to help stimulate the economy and not show how the two parties can work together. It sounds to me like someone has their priorities wrong. Don't get me wrong, something needs to be done to help get the economy going. But does "new uniforms for TSA" or "polar icebreakers" get it done? I don't think so! How about building "nature trails"? Nope. Providing help to states for unemployment insurance? Nope. High speed internet access to rural and underserved areas? Don't think so.
I recently heard an idea by a good friend of mine suggest the government give every tax payer like $100,000. Let them spend it the way they want. I ran the idea past a number of other friends and co-workers and it was very well-received unlike the government ideas. One co-worker said he'd take a couple of vacations that he hadn't taken in years (stimulate the travel industry). Another said they'd buy a car (stimulate the auto industry). Another one said they'd pay off their credit cards (stimulate the banking industry). Think of all the other things that it could do....sure, some people would save the money, but others might pay for college or invest in the stock market or purchase real estate. Almost every last one of these ideas helps the economy. And all without government oversight (who's going to oversee the government programs?). The only oversight needed is to make sure all the taxpayers get their money.
Why does the government always have to make things so difficult? Many times the easiest solution is the best.
Here's the link to the pdf form of the bill being debated in the
Senate. Check out all the "goodies" buried inside for yourself.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1eh.txt.pdf
Also check out this article on Bloomberg.com. Very disheartening!
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=aLzfDxfbwhzs
You fail to see the fundimental economic problem: there is insufficient consumer demand in our economy. The government stimulus is intended to be demand in place of consumer demand. So, why don't "new uniforms for TSA" or "polar icebreakers" qualify as additional demand? You may not agree that these expenses are necessary, but that's a separate debate. What can not be debated is this: the purchase of TSA uniforms, polar icebreakers, nature trails, high speed internet infrastructure, roads, and bridges, all boost economic demand, leading to increased production, increased employment, and (hopefully) increased CONSUMER demand (Who's going to manufacture or install those TSA uniforms, the polar icebreakers, the nature trails, the internet components, the roads, the bridges, and so on?!).
I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand about this. Virtually all government spending serves is an economic stimulu. It's all demand!!!
Furthermore, your suggestion of giving all tax payers $100,000 would NOT solve our economic problem. We do not have a lack of money in our economy (goodness, the federal funds rate is at 0% meaning banks can borrow money at almost no cost; personal savings rates have been increasing in recent months for the first time in more than a generation meaning people have been socking away money and not spending it; demand for government bonds is at an all time high). Those who have their jobs are not spending their money as they have in recent years. Giving people more money (tax breaks, "stimulus" checks) will not mean a 1 for 1 increase in consumer demand (aka spending). Do taxpayers wish to fork out, say, $500B in stimulus checks to find out that only $200B was actually spent leading to job creation, etc?
Finally, your idea of giving every tax payer $100K would really bankrupt this country. Some math: $100,000 x 100,000,000 (estimated number of American tax payers) = 10,000,000,000,000 (10 Trillion) If you take the current stimulus bill (about $800B) and spread it out amonst the 100M US taxpayers, each would get about $8,000. A nice sum, but not quite the 100K you proposed.
wow Yankee, spoken like a true liberal. I supponse you would like the government to tell us how to live every aspect of our life too!
- Meeting a "Celebrity"
- Should the Brewer's Make a Trade? (3)
- Get With the Program Milwaukee! (4)
- Trash on TV (1)
- Sportsmanship isn't dead
- Stimulus or Wasteful Spending? (3)
- Whine, whine, whine
- Polar Bear Plunge Milwaukee 2009
- Future of Print Newspapers
- Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow (2)
- More Bill's Blog posts
Tags: stimulus
Permalink | Email This Blog