by Oakley » Fri 09 Sep 2011, 13:03:41
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'F')irst I want to say kudos to coming up with a better name than the typical lame Dem contraption like Stimulus Two or something.
Politically it seems to include some things pubs can vote for, if they are going to vote for anything and also puts them on the spot about taxes lower vs upper.
Overall I'm not sure really what the government can do aside from trying to keep money moving by borrowing and spending. The accumulation class is doing quite well so obviously our economic problems aren't due to lack of investment potential, over regulation, etc.
We don't have a supply problem, we have a demand problem.
Oh, just about the speechifing, I also thought it was about time that O and the dems in general got around to making the case that there is a role for government. They have been back on their heels since the great society started looking like the politburo. The War on Poverty helped a lot of people but of course went too far, just like the War on Drugs and now the War on Terror.
I'm not certain that anything is going to improve the economy, actually I'm not certain the economy should improve. For me personally, learning to live lower on the hog is the main preparation for PO. If world GDP is bound to decrease, then perhaps the best preparation for the country as a whole is learning to live lower on the food chain.
The title given to a bill is a form of advertising, often to mislead and cover up the inadequacies of the product. The "Patriot Act" was hardly patriotic, and most "tax reform bills" are just the opposite.
This current legislative proposal is just more of the already discredited economics of Keynes. The failure of demand is a result of spenders being overburdened with debt. The debt came from prior government interference in the market place to begin with by making credit very easy, and even more fundamentally by instituting in 1913 a debt based money system (all of our money is bank debt, created out of thin air and loaned to the public). Now that the debt burden is crushing, people are not spending enough because their money is going to the required debt payments. A huge number of people, businesses and the federal government are walking cases of bankruptcy, but instead of letting them default so they can get out from under their debt burden, the federal government is propping them up enough to keep them in debt and keep them not having free spending cash. All these attempts to prevent people from suffering the consequences of their financial mistakes just stretches out the depression. There is a description of depressions that says they are in size in proportion to the debt created in the prior boom, and in length in proportion to the effort of government to prevent them.
But even more insidious is the creation of more debt based money as Obama is proposing. Creating more money dilutes its value. So people must pay more for what they buy as prices rise, or don't fall as much as they otherwise would. This reduces the ability of people to buy things, and wages never keep up with the price increases, especially since businesses are not doing so well.
The short term answer is to just let the debt be liquidated through bankruptcy so that we can then move forward. The wrong answer, which Obama has chosen is to both increase debt levels and prop up the walking bankrupts, keeping them under the burden of their current debts. A more fundamental long term answer is to gradually shift out of the current debt based monetary system, into one of gold and silver coins (and their electronic warehouse receipt equivalents), coupled with 100% banking reserve requirements. As long as we continue with the Federal Reserve and commercial banks having the power to create money out of thin air and loan it into existence at interest, fleecing the public in the process, we will not have a stable or equitable economy.