So, I am filled with a dual sense of anger and joy about the stimulus bill passing. I am of the opinion that one was needed, and not just one filled with tax cuts, I don't think that would have helped much of anything. However, I am angry at how it seems people (see democrats in the House and Senate for the most part), decided that this was the time to increase spending on so many of the things that they support. Now, some of these can be argued that they are good and worthwhile or not, but thats not what this bill was supposed to be about. This was emergency stimulus, meant to be money injected into our economy to create jobs, stop losses, boost the economy, and in general begin to right the ship of the American economy. Some of it did that, and I am grateful that it passed, some I think is the worst kind of irresponsible spending forced through under the guise of stimulus, and peppered with the threats of 'if you don't pass this, people will lose their jobs'.
As of now, I will be referring to the house bill, as that is the one that I could readily find this specific info on. This won't be the final product, but I doubt it will be too much better. I will be referring to this chart I found it helpful.
Good Things: Military construction, Highway construction, federal building repair, water infrastructure, defense facility repair, national park renovation, anything construction related.
Maybe: modernizing nations electricity grid (depending on what is meant by this), Elementary and secondary school renovations (again, depending on what they mean specifically), community development grants (" "), Rural development, Extend unemployment benefits (this one is a big iffy for me, it really depends on how it is implemented)
Things I don't like at all:
18.5 billion for renewable energy programs. The only way I would be on board with this is if it were actual construction, this shouldn't be a research bill (though I support research funding, just not here).
17 billion for pell grants. This has nothing to do with stimulus, again I am not against pell grants as a rule, but it doesn't belong in this bill.
20 billion for food stamps. Before anyone gets up in arms about me wanting kids to starve, if this program is getting stretched thin, then they need to look at how it is run. I found this on the internet. It has a chart of maximum amounts you can get based on number in family and income. One example, the maximum for 5 people in the household (same as I have), is 643 dollars. I make what I consider to be a fairly good living, and we budget 200 dollars a month for groceries. Now, that is low end, because we choose to put money on other budget things, and we could definitely spend more. But 643 dollars as a monthly grocery budget is frivilous. Flat out frivilous and irresponsible. The fact of the matter is, if we needed to, we could survive on less (and I don't mean just eating ramen). 200 dollars a month is eating well, but making choices, and shopping sales etc. I in no way support 20 billion more to food stamps, not until there is a complete overhaul of their evaluation system, then if they still need more money, I would be behind it.
11.1 billion, other unemployment compensation, I don't even know what that means, they already added more on for unemployment insurance.
29 billion on education programs. This is not an education bill, its supposed to be stimulus. I don't care if the programs are awesome, this is the wrong place.
20.2 billion to the Dept. of Health and Human services. Their budget is wildly bloated if they actual can claim to need 20 billion more. I would love to know what they specify this money is needed for.
5.6 billion in expanding broadband. Again, this is not stimulus. It can be argued (and is elsewhere on this blog), whether its something the feds should get involved in, but certainly not in a stimulus bill.
3 billion in research grants. Wrong place, period.
40.8 billion in health insurance assistance for the unemployed. This looks like an end run frankly. I'm not sure exactly how or in what way this is supposed to be implemented, they already have 90 billion in temporary federal medical assistance (I assume medicaid and medicare).
So, just those things are 165 billion dollars. None of which I see as even remotely stimulus. Oh well, whats done is done. But I don't like how it was done.
2 comments:
"Money, pardon the expression, is like manure. It's not worth a thing unless it's spread around, encouraging young things to grow." --Dolly Levi
First off, let me confess to being fairly ignorant of economics. My understanding of the idea behind "economic stimulus" is that we want to avoid a vicious cycle where people don't spend, so businesses cut back, so people have less to spend. If this premise is correct, then stimulus could be targeted at either side of the equation: give free money, tax breaks, or government work to the businesses so they don't cut back, or give free money, tax breaks, or government work to the people so they keep spending. So far so good?
Most of your "Good Things" and "Maybe" I'm fine with. They mostly fall into the business side of things. I'm not sure about the community development grants, which as I understand it pay for starting up good-doing community programs. I worry about the creation of unfundable things that will just wither and die.
The research and education stuff is stupid in a "stimulus" bill, since it only has iffy long-term trickle-down effects. The medical stuff has no place in this discussion either; that's another debate the whole country has to have later. The broadband money is a payoff to telecom companies who are loyal campaign contributors, and it will do nothing to combat the evils of the Internet duopoly. Besides, I haven't heard of any ISPs in financial trouble; have you?
Now we come to some things I'm not so ignorant about: unemployment and food stamps. Good or bad, these are absolutely stimulus programs, and indeed always have been.
The food stamp program was always a subsidy for the agribusinesses. That "making choices and shopping sales" that gets you down to $200 per month is just the kind of thing food stamps are designed to prevent. I'm curious where the extra funding will go, though: higher income limits, or higher allotments?
During my ten months on unemployment I spent a tad on vocational school and socked away the rest living with Mom and Dad, but most unemployment recipients are different. That is money that gets spread around, encouraging young things to grow. But if the feds want more of it going out, they'd better pluck it from the federal money tree, because the normal source of the money is as a sort of "insurance premium" levied on the employers, who again we don't want cutting back.
So I mostly agree with you, but I think a couple of the things you're suspicious of really do count as stimulus. Whether that's good or bad is another question.
I'll give you, the food stamps could probably be seen as stimulus. I just don't agree with it in particular. I would question, like you, how it would be implemented. I would also question whether it is a short term 'emergency' increase, or long term. I will change my assesment to it is stimulus, but it is in entirely the wrong place.
My question on unemployment is more in the 'how will this be implemented' nature. The 'other unemployment assistance' in particular. There are things like job training and the like that for instance would be good programs, but not appropriate in a stimulus bill.
Post a Comment