Reduction Context
We’ve heard that the new “stimulus” may range anywhere from .7 to 1.3 trillion dollars. One of the most recent numbers was 920 something billion dollars (its been rather difficult to keep track of the constantly changing value). Now word is that senators are working diligently to cut 100 billion off the total cost (whatever that ends up being) so they can get enough Republicans to sign on to this mess of a bill.
To me, this is very like telling an average couple who can not even dream of affording a $1-million-dollar home that they should not worry, we’ll cut 100K off the top and then they’ll be able to afford it.
I realize that all analogies have their problems, but really, is it that difficult? We got into trouble by creating more debt that we could service (at personal, corporate and governmental levels) now we just need to create a whole lot of debt really, really fast and everything will work out?
UPDATE
A few words from Jay Reding are appropriate here:
Disseminate via | Facebook | Twitter | Digg | StumbleUponThis bill is not about stimulus. It’s about the Democratic Party looting the future to pay off their political supporters. It is nearly 100% pure pork that will saddle the future with at least another $1,000,000,000,000 in debt—not counting interest. Even the Congressional Budget Office finds that the “stimulus” bill will just shift the costs to future generations. We can’t rob Peter to pay Paul and expect to get away with it. Recent history should demonstrate all too well why such ideas don’t work.
We need a real stimulus package, not an act of wanton irresponsibility. If President Obama were to demonstrate real leadership, he would tell Reid and Pelosi to stop playing childish partisan games and send him a bill that is nothing but stimulus and no pork—and if they refuse, he should veto it. We need real infrastructure repair, not political cronyism. The only shovel that’s ready to go is the shovel needed to clear out all the B.S. surrounding this bill.




One Comment, Comment or Ping
Chet
08 February 2009, 1:13, UTC
Jay Reding is, as always, deeply unserious. In addition to apparently not getting the memo that the CBO report he refers to never existed, I notice he doesn’t even try to calculate the cost to future generations of a decade-long recession.
“100% pure pork”? Absurd. What does he think is going to be in a stimulus bill – in a bill designed to counteract a contraction of economic demand? Oh, right. Cuts in the capital gains tax. Funny how that works – when the economy is up, Republicans want cuts in the capital gains tax. When the economy is down – cuts in the capital gains tax!
Why, you’d almost get the sense that the Republican agenda has absolutely nothing to do with the situation at hand, and has everything to do with seizing any excuse to advance Republican ideology.