erynthered Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 http://www.freedomworks.org/publications/t...se-the-stimulus Top 10 Reasons to Oppose the Stimulus As with medicine, the first rule of law making should be first, do no harm. The "stimulus" bill fails this test spectacularly. Among so many other reasons to tell your U.S. Representative and Senators in Washington to oppose the stimulus, the Top 10 are: 1. The Stimulus Will Not Work Our history is replete with examples of "stimulus" spending failing to move our economy toward prosperity--Bush just tried it, Ford tried it. Even Christina Romer, Obama's Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers agrees. Romer wrote in a study, "Our estimates suggest that fiscal actions contributed only moderately to recoveries." The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression and Obama's stimulus package won't end this recession. In fact, two UCLA economists published a study in 2004 finding FDR's similar New Deal policies prolonged the Great Depression by seven years. It fails because you don't increase economic output by taking a dollar from one person and giving to another. The idea of "stimulus" spending falls for the " broken window fallacy"--the allure of what is seen versus what is not seen. We will see the jobs created by the government spending. What we won't see are the jobs lost because consumers have less money to spend because the government got the money its spending from us--the only place it can get money. 2. The Stimulus follows the same plan that ruined Japan's economy Japan, after a dramatic market crash and a drop in real estate prices responded with government spending not unlike what the US Congress is considering today. In fact, they had 10 stimulus bills between 1992 and 2000, spending billions on infrastructure construction, building bridges, roads, and airports as well as pouring money into biotech and telecommunications. While many countries enjoyed booming economies and falling unemployment during this time, Japan had a lost decade, seeing its unemployment more than double. They spent double the US level of GDP on infrastructure, and now have a lousy economy and have one of the highest national debts in the world. After 10 stimulus packages, Japan has gone from having the second biggest economy in the world by a long shot, to being well behind the new number two, China, and is close to falling behind India. We do not want to follow their lead. 3. The Stimulus is full of Wasteful Projects While we were told the stimulus bill would focus on rebuilding America's infrastructure--mainly the roads and bridges--only 5% of the current bill goes to such projects. The rest of the bill goes to pet projects like: * $400,000,000.00 for researching sexually transmitted diseases * $200,000,000.00 to force the military to buy environmentally-friendly electric cars * $34,000,000.00 to renovate the Department of Commerce headquarters * $75,000,000.00 for a program to end smoking which, if successful will bankrupt the State Children's Health Program Democrats are about to pass (SCHIP) that is paid for by cigarette taxes * $650,000,000.00 for digital TV coupons * $50,000,000.00 for the National Endowment for the Arts These programs are just the 2008 version of the " midnight basketball" program that derailed Bill Clinton's attempt to ram through a "stimulus" bill in 1992. Despite that bill failing, the economy quickly recovered and the economic boom of the 1990s began. 4. The Government Can't Afford the Stimulus President Bush pushed the government deep into a $1.2 trillion deficit this year, the third time he has set a record for biggest deficit ever, and President Obama's stimulus bill follows his lead, piling on more debt. The deficit in 2008 amounted to about 8 percent of GDP. The entire debt is about 35 percent of GDP. Even for those who do still believe in Keynesianism, it is important to remember his theory didn't start with the government already over a trillion dollars in the hole, he was generally operating from balanced budgets. 5. We Can't afford the Stimulus How much is $825 billion? The Heritage Foundation has calculated that that comes to over $10,000 per American family. To further put that in context, on average, families annually spend: * $2,230 on apparel and services * $3,595 on health care * $4,322 on food at home * $11,657 on shelter 6. The Stimulus is Bigger Than the Economic Output of Most Countries If this bill were a country, it'd be the 15th largest country in world, ranking between Australia and Mexico. It is bigger than the economies of Saudi Arabia and Iran combined. In fact, the $875 billion it calls for is more than all the cash in the United States. 7. Central Planning like the Stimulus Doesn't Work, Ask the USSR If centrally planned government spending on a grand scale produced economic growth, the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War. If government spending on a grand scale produced economic growth we would be in the middle of the Bush Boom right now. It doesn't. Working, saving, and investing leads to economic output and increases in productivity lead to growth. As economics professor Steven Horwitz said, "The stimulus plans assume consumption is the source of growth. It is not. It is the consequence of said growth." 8. Remember the $750 Billion Bailout from this Fall? It was just a couple months ago when we were told if we would just quickly hand over $750 billion to the Treasury Secretary to bailout his friends on Wall Street, he would make the economy all better. That didn't work, and neither will an additional $825 billion. 9. This Money Doesn't Grow on Trees And this has nothing to do with paper money being made of cotton and linen. The only way the government gets money is through taxing, borrowing, or printing--that is, it has to take it out of the economy in order to put it back into the economy. If government borrows the money for the stimulus, then it will either have to print money later or raise taxes to pay it back. If it raises taxes to pay for the stimulus, it will, in effect, be robbing Peter to pay Paul - probably with interest. If it prints the money, inflation decreases the value of the dollar for every American - robbing Paul to pay Paul. 10. Economists do NOT Agree this is a Good Idea No matter how many times supporters of the bill say it, economists do not all agree this bill is a good idea. In fact, hundreds of economists have come out against it, including Noble Laureates, who signed a letter the Cato Institute ran as a full page ad in several major newspapers opposing the stimulus. Still more economists submitted statements to the US House of Representatives opposing the stimulus proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 We don't always see eye to eye. However, this was a great post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Top 10 Reasons to Oppose the Stimulus 1. The Stimulus Will Not Work Our history is replete with examples of "stimulus" spending failing to move our economy toward prosperity--Bush just tried it, Ford tried it. Even Christina Romer, Obama's Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers agrees. Romer wrote in a study, "Our estimates suggest that fiscal actions contributed only moderately to recoveries." The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression and Obama's stimulus package won't end this recession. In fact, two UCLA economists published a study in 2004 finding FDR's similar New Deal policies prolonged the Great Depression by seven years. It fails because you don't increase economic output by taking a dollar from one person and giving to another. The idea of "stimulus" spending falls for the " broken window fallacy"--the allure of what is seen versus what is not seen. We will see the jobs created by the government spending. What we won't see are the jobs lost because consumers have less money to spend because the government got the money its spending from us--the only place it can get money. 2. The Stimulus follows the same plan that ruined Japan's economy 3. The Stimulus is full of Wasteful Projects .... How did Bush just try this? I've seen views on both sides of the FDR New Deal working/not working. So, IMO, to use that as an argument is to get into a histrionics debate. How exactly, is this Bill taking from one and giving to another? In fact, this Bill cuts taxes. I don't see any tax increases in it at all. What it does, in fact, is use money that we don't have. So, perhaps you could say we're taking future generation's money. Certainly, you could argue that adding to the federal deficit to this degree does more long term harm than short term good, but that has nothing to do with taking from the rich and giving to the poor. The government has pretty well perfected the art of getting money from thin air. That's why the federal deficit is as large as it is. So to conclude that they're going to recoup the cost of this Bill from higher taxes, implies that they can recoup the costs of all the previous year's spending with higher taxes. I think anyone will say that our deficit is so high, currently, that increased taxes alone will do nothing to decrease it. But, let's just assume taxes aree raised in a year... is it to pay for this bill or to pay for the previous 10 years of spending? Does it really matter? I really have no idea what ruined Japan's economy; but it'd be nice to see some evidence that it was government spending and not some list of other extraneous events. Regardless, just because they couldn't make it work, we should assume we can't either? Again, we really need to know a trillion more details before we could have any real discussion about Japan's economy. Many of those have supposedly been removed from the Senate's version. And the wastefulness of some are entirely up for debate. For example, I don't see forcing the military and government to use electric cars as wasteful. Some American auto maker has to make all those cars, do they not? Tell, Ford that buying 100,000 cars (I just made that number up) is a waste of money and I'm sure they'd disagree. Ok... not enough time to really go through the rest of those reasons. IMO, many of them are highly debatable if not just inaccurate statements. I think there are very good arguments against this bill and/or portions of the bill; I just don't think these are them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 I don't see forcing the military and government to use electric cars as wasteful. Which simply means you have no idea what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted February 6, 2009 Author Share Posted February 6, 2009 We don't always see eye to eye. However, this was a great post. The only thing missing from that top ten was the auto bailout. Other than that, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Which simply means you have no idea what you're talking about. But of course. I'd dare to say, the vast majority of people here have no idea what they're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 While we were told the stimulus bill would focus on rebuilding America's infrastructure--mainly the roads and bridges--only 5% of the current bill goes to such projects. The rest of the bill goes to pet projects like:* $400,000,000.00 for researching sexually transmitted diseases Care to explain why this is bad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 * $75,000,000.00 for a program to end smoking which, if successful will bankrupt the State Children's Health Program Democrats are about to pass (SCHIP) that is paid for by cigarette taxes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Care to explain why this is bad? because the bill is tagged as being an emergency stimulus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 because the bill is tagged as being an emergency stimulus? Believe it or not, funding scientific research can stimulate the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 because the bill is tagged as being an emergency stimulus? You mean the plan whose name is "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009" which has never been thought of or spoke of by Obama as just a stimulus plan since day one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Believe it or not, funding scientific research can stimulate the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I can agree with a lot of what you said, but I hardly see researching fatal diseases as wasteful- or ending smoking- I couldn't care less who that would bankrupt- if they profit from smoking, they can rot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 "Can". Not "will". "Can". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 "Can". Not "will". "Can". Yeah, about a decade (and usually more) down the road. And generally because they discover something totally outside of what they were actually researching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 "Can". Not "will". "Can". Can Can? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 I can agree with a lot of what you said, but I hardly see researching fatal diseases as wasteful- or ending smoking- I couldn't care less who that would bankrupt- if they profit from smoking, they can rot So you don't see a contradiction between trying to end smoking with one program while paying for another program by paying for cigarette taxes? Assume the quit smoking program reduces smoking. You either have to cancel children's health care or find a new source of revenue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/f...over-long-haul/ CBO doesn't seem to think it's a good idea either. It'll provide short term relief but hurt over the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweet baboo Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 Believe it or not, funding scientific research can stimulate the economy. eh? more graduate students making 22k a year that don't contribute to product development in industry which is really what spurs the economy? more pipet tips and eppendorf tubes sold by VWR? I'm a PhD product of Biomedical/Chemical engineering research also and I'm not seeing it. I suppose if there are any major discoveries, some pharmaceutical company could run with it and make tons of money, however no immediate cash infusion is going to result in a drug that is going to boost the economy within 4 years. On top of that, what STD needs to be cured so badly that it's going to be a huge cash cow? HIV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted February 7, 2009 Share Posted February 7, 2009 11. Obama should take a lesson from our ex-retard in chief, Bush. You CAN'T spend your way out of a recession. You can only spend your way into one. Shouldn't our current president have learned from the last idiot? http://www.freedomworks.org/publications/t...se-the-stimulus Top 10 Reasons to Oppose the Stimulus As with medicine, the first rule of law making should be first, do no harm. The "stimulus" bill fails this test spectacularly. Among so many other reasons to tell your U.S. Representative and Senators in Washington to oppose the stimulus, the Top 10 are: 1. The Stimulus Will Not Work Our history is replete with examples of "stimulus" spending failing to move our economy toward prosperity--Bush just tried it, Ford tried it. Even Christina Romer, Obama's Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers agrees. Romer wrote in a study, "Our estimates suggest that fiscal actions contributed only moderately to recoveries." The New Deal didn't end the Great Depression and Obama's stimulus package won't end this recession. In fact, two UCLA economists published a study in 2004 finding FDR's similar New Deal policies prolonged the Great Depression by seven years. It fails because you don't increase economic output by taking a dollar from one person and giving to another. The idea of "stimulus" spending falls for the " broken window fallacy"--the allure of what is seen versus what is not seen. We will see the jobs created by the government spending. What we won't see are the jobs lost because consumers have less money to spend because the government got the money its spending from us--the only place it can get money. 2. The Stimulus follows the same plan that ruined Japan's economy Japan, after a dramatic market crash and a drop in real estate prices responded with government spending not unlike what the US Congress is considering today. In fact, they had 10 stimulus bills between 1992 and 2000, spending billions on infrastructure construction, building bridges, roads, and airports as well as pouring money into biotech and telecommunications. While many countries enjoyed booming economies and falling unemployment during this time, Japan had a lost decade, seeing its unemployment more than double. They spent double the US level of GDP on infrastructure, and now have a lousy economy and have one of the highest national debts in the world. After 10 stimulus packages, Japan has gone from having the second biggest economy in the world by a long shot, to being well behind the new number two, China, and is close to falling behind India. We do not want to follow their lead. 3. The Stimulus is full of Wasteful Projects While we were told the stimulus bill would focus on rebuilding America's infrastructure--mainly the roads and bridges--only 5% of the current bill goes to such projects. The rest of the bill goes to pet projects like: * $400,000,000.00 for researching sexually transmitted diseases * $200,000,000.00 to force the military to buy environmentally-friendly electric cars * $34,000,000.00 to renovate the Department of Commerce headquarters * $75,000,000.00 for a program to end smoking which, if successful will bankrupt the State Children's Health Program Democrats are about to pass (SCHIP) that is paid for by cigarette taxes * $650,000,000.00 for digital TV coupons * $50,000,000.00 for the National Endowment for the Arts These programs are just the 2008 version of the " midnight basketball" program that derailed Bill Clinton's attempt to ram through a "stimulus" bill in 1992. Despite that bill failing, the economy quickly recovered and the economic boom of the 1990s began. 4. The Government Can't Afford the Stimulus President Bush pushed the government deep into a $1.2 trillion deficit this year, the third time he has set a record for biggest deficit ever, and President Obama's stimulus bill follows his lead, piling on more debt. The deficit in 2008 amounted to about 8 percent of GDP. The entire debt is about 35 percent of GDP. Even for those who do still believe in Keynesianism, it is important to remember his theory didn't start with the government already over a trillion dollars in the hole, he was generally operating from balanced budgets. 5. We Can't afford the Stimulus How much is $825 billion? The Heritage Foundation has calculated that that comes to over $10,000 per American family. To further put that in context, on average, families annually spend: * $2,230 on apparel and services * $3,595 on health care * $4,322 on food at home * $11,657 on shelter 6. The Stimulus is Bigger Than the Economic Output of Most Countries If this bill were a country, it'd be the 15th largest country in world, ranking between Australia and Mexico. It is bigger than the economies of Saudi Arabia and Iran combined. In fact, the $875 billion it calls for is more than all the cash in the United States. 7. Central Planning like the Stimulus Doesn't Work, Ask the USSR If centrally planned government spending on a grand scale produced economic growth, the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War. If government spending on a grand scale produced economic growth we would be in the middle of the Bush Boom right now. It doesn't. Working, saving, and investing leads to economic output and increases in productivity lead to growth. As economics professor Steven Horwitz said, "The stimulus plans assume consumption is the source of growth. It is not. It is the consequence of said growth." 8. Remember the $750 Billion Bailout from this Fall? It was just a couple months ago when we were told if we would just quickly hand over $750 billion to the Treasury Secretary to bailout his friends on Wall Street, he would make the economy all better. That didn't work, and neither will an additional $825 billion. 9. This Money Doesn't Grow on Trees And this has nothing to do with paper money being made of cotton and linen. The only way the government gets money is through taxing, borrowing, or printing--that is, it has to take it out of the economy in order to put it back into the economy. If government borrows the money for the stimulus, then it will either have to print money later or raise taxes to pay it back. If it raises taxes to pay for the stimulus, it will, in effect, be robbing Peter to pay Paul - probably with interest. If it prints the money, inflation decreases the value of the dollar for every American - robbing Paul to pay Paul. 10. Economists do NOT Agree this is a Good Idea No matter how many times supporters of the bill say it, economists do not all agree this bill is a good idea. In fact, hundreds of economists have come out against it, including Noble Laureates, who signed a letter the Cato Institute ran as a full page ad in several major newspapers opposing the stimulus. Still more economists submitted statements to the US House of Representatives opposing the stimulus proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts