I was listening to the a news program tonight where Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison got to talking about the Recovery Act of 2009. She was not very happy with it. Her major objection - 'too much pork, unnecessary spending'. When pressed to identify any item of concern, she could not. What was revealing was her identification that although the President has said there were no earmarks or pork in this bill, when the bureaucracy gets their hands on it, 'they will put their own earmarks into it'. When you actually define what this means, someone will be making money, that's a given. But what Senator Hutchison is really upset about is that she will not have any control of where the money is going. It's not that money will be going to Texas, some of it most definitely will, but she won't be able to decide where or who in Texas gets it. It's never about the what, but always about the who and from whom.
Speaking of the whom, Joe Scarborough of MSNBC fame was on a rant during his Morning Joe show. He wouldn't let up. His beef: Congress is spending too much too quickly. $300 Billion would be plenty now. Wait 6-12 months, assess how the economy is responding, then potentially send out another $300 Billion. I think the Scarborough man has been watching too many time-released capsules commercials. One criticism of Japan during its decade of deflation during the 1990's was that too little money was pushed into the economy over too long a time. It wasn't until 2004 that Japan reached GDP growth of other major economies. If we learn something from history, it is that more money introduced quicker will have a better, faster impact than slow/longer. What Joe really wants is to put the breaks on Obama's liberal agenda. The package has billions of dollars that will support social programs lasting for a very long time. The Bush administration manufactured a war, forcing the country into debt, to preclude any money being left for social programs. This strategy would have worked except that the US Economy was ignored by that administration, allowing for the rampant corruption, non-controlled markets to freely gamble and lose the public's money. We are now experiencing the backlash, trillion dollar debt be damned.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nice!
ReplyDeleteI tried adding a comment, but the site stumped me - I'm not terribly familiar with blog mechanics. Here's what I intended to say in response to your last post:
Ensemble Thinking
The pundits on MSNBC, Fox, even the US Senate etc. have yet to understand the multi-dimensional approach undertaken by the Obama adminstration to tackle our current economic mess. Headlines generate ad revenue and raise poll numbers. The time honored method of generating headlines? Pick apart a complex plan.
I have a strong suspicion that Obama has most of the right elements in his plan, that the markets will respond appropriately - even sooner than hoped. This is partly due to the plan itself, but also due to the positive changes that are already taking place. I'm talking about the recent sales of high quality corporate debt ($78B, according to WSJ) and the established floor on the DJIA (8,000). Watch the stock of any company that stands to gain by this plan - such as Ingersoll Rand. They were up big time on news of the Obama plan's success yesterday. Four million new or saved jobs won't be far behind.
Thanks for stopping by. Your thoughts concerning tracking stimulus connected companies makes sense, but the volatility of the market is such that I find it hard to identify correlation from noise. I'll take your suggestion and follow Ingersoll Rand. I imagine other major manufacturers would be other candidates. Caterpillar is recently in the news. UTC may be another with local interest.
ReplyDeleteHeadlines sell newspapers. It's a time honored axiom holding true through this generation's analogues. It gets so bad that I'm never certain anymore if whatever is said during any of these "pundit discussion shows" is said because someone believes what they are saying or just getting a perspective out there to sell something - the show, a book, their spouses' consultant company, their own consultant company.
Looking for an old fashioned news show where the issues are at the forefront and the talking heads egos take a backseat? Check out the The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on PBS. The production standards are so limited it almost seems the equivalent of watching black and white TV (with or without rabbit ears). Less flash and tons of substance!
ReplyDeleteThe NewsHour actually has intelligent reporters/moderators who are not pushing a politically partisan agenda* and have a non sensationalist style. Interviewees are afforded time for thoughful and detailed responses and they are discouraged from reducing complex discussions into 10 second sound bites. The responses are actually listened to be the moderator and the dialog can actually be fluid and enlightening.
In a recent interview between Lehrer and V.P Dick Chaney the later, speaking on behalf the the Bush Administration (as opposed to just his Vice Presidency), Chaney took responsibility for nothing. Terrorism? Clinton's fault. Housing? Democratic Congress to blame? Banking/Hedge Funds? Ditto, it's all on the Democrats? The war in Iraq and Qitmo? Well don't you know those Iraqi's are all out to get us! WMD? Whoops, hey nobody is perfect.
I'm glad Chaney enlightened me on the helplessness of an Executive Branch without control of Congress. I wonder how Reagan and all the others got pieces of their agenda in play. I guess Bush/Chaney needed a dictatorship.
Washington largely focuses on the 'who' and not the 'what'. And the 'who' is not us. Positions are often taken based on perceived political advantage as opposed to what is best for the country.
Take the Republican push back on tax credits for home insulation. Insulation is good for the environment. Someone has to install it and it saves the homeowner money. Hmmmmm, the environment, jobs, extra money to save or purchase. Why push back on that? Perhaps because they won't get credit for the idea?
* The great conservation Buckley had a show on PBS for years. The thought that PBS is the liberal counter to FNN is a joke.