Bring on the pork ...

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

???

So, you want two debates?

On second thought it sounds like a great stimulus package. It will accomplish one thing and one thing only. Now, my question is when will the government get to work on that other thing!

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by tooblue

So, you want two debates?

On second thought it sounds like a great stimulus package. It will accomplish one thing and one thing only. Now, my question is when will the government get to work on that other thing!

I mean at 800 milliongabillion dollars per one thing, fixing this mess will be easy!

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by tooblue

I mean at 800 milliongabillion dollars per one thing, fixing this mess will be easy!

Not to mention cheap!

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

There are a few theories on how to stimulate the economy. One theory is that you spend as much as possible, in diverse sectors of the economy, to lift multiple sectors rather than just one. Water and sewer plants hire people. Construction work requires people doing jobs. Those people get money rather than get laid off. You may argue it isn't the BEST way to stimulate the economy (debatable, and nobody really knows), but it is totally absurd to argue it has no effect on the economy at all. Spending of this amount will have an effect. The debate ought to be whether it is the most efficient way of attaining the desired result rather than whether there is any effect at all.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Spending money keeps people employed. Employed people have money to spend. Poor people must spend money (they can't save), so the best stimulus involves money directed towards them. If that makes you feel bad, take it up with principles of economics, or spend money on infrastructure, or something OTHER THAN tax cuts.

...

An Associated Press analysis of stimulus spending found that it didn't matter if a lot of money was spent on highways or none at all: Local unemployment rates rose and fell regardless. And the stimulus spending only barely helped the beleaguered construction industry, the analysis showed.

...

But AP's analysis, which was reviewed by independent economists at five universities, showed the strategy of pumping transportation money into counties hasn't affected local unemployment rates so far.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/...s_unemployment

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

...



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/...s_unemployment

http://www.agc.org/cs/news_media/pre...release.id=484

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/0...nd-burned.html

http://www.marginalrevolution.com/ma...-stimulus.html

http://www.aei.org/outlook/100928

Nice try.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

http://www.agc.org/cs/news_media/pre...release.id=484

http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/0...nd-burned.html

http://www.marginalrevolution.com/ma...-stimulus.html

http://www.aei.org/outlook/100928

Nice try.

BOOM SHAKALAKA!

Cali channels the responses of a right-wing economist and a conservative think tank and scorches Tex's reference to a phantom study.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

BOOM SHAKALAKA!

Cali channels the responses of a right-wing economist and a conservative think tank and scorches Tex's reference to a phantom study.

I feel like Tex isn't even trying anymore. It makes this less fun.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

BOOM SHAKALAKA!

Cali channels the responses of a right-wing economist and a conservative think tank and scorches Tex's reference to a phantom study.

Heh, he didn't "scorch" anything. I skimmed the links, and only one (the first) appeared to offer any substantive criticism of the analysis (note: the AP did not call it a "study" in the academic sense).

But hey, I'm not here to defend the AP. It was they and 5 economists who did the analysis, so take it up with them. I report, you decide.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Heh, he didn't "scorch" anything. I skimmed the links, and only one (the first) appeared to offer any substantive criticism of the analysis (note: the AP did not call it a "study" in the academic sense).

But hey, I'm not here to defend the AP. It was they and 5 economists who did the analysis, so take it up with them. I report, you decide.

So you never take responsibility for your own links because you never read them thoroughly. OK, I get it.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

So you never take responsibility for your own links because you never read them thoroughly. OK, I get it.

No, you don't get it at all.

I read the AP story fully and understood exactly what they were saying. But that doesn't make me responsible for defending them; they can do that on their own.