Comments on: Very Little Stimulus Spending So Far

By: DL

DL — Thu, 14 May 2009 16:52:02 +0000

We don't want the economy to peak until Nov. 2010, do we?

By: Bithead

Bithead — Thu, 14 May 2009 16:18:22 +0000

All of this reduces to irrelevancy all the deficit spending going on... at least insofar as the stated goals are concerned. The questions that should be getting automatically asked at this point, then is what WERE the original goals, and what did tossing all that taxpayer finding around actually DO?

I have a feeling we're going to find out when the tax bill comes due.

By: Rick DeMent

Rick DeMent — Thu, 14 May 2009 13:37:20 +0000

Still not fast enough. Unless you really think the economy will be in recession for 2 more years.

I think that 2 years is kind of optimistic?

By: G.A.Phillips

G.A.Phillips — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:17:13 +0000

The slower they flush money down the drain the better, but it's still swirling.

By: sam

sam — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:10:28 +0000

BTW, let me commend the following blog for all those interested in things economic: The Epicurean Dealmaker. Especially delicious is Monday's lead story: "More of a Kickin' Sitcheyation". Enjoy.

By: Drew

Drew — Thu, 14 May 2009 01:57:31 +0000

JKB -

Correct. Which of course is why it wasn't the preferred policy. Money in the hands of private enterprise? Egad??!!

Money in the hands of govt buros???? Now yer talkin...........

As we hurtle toward a wall..............

By: JKB

JKB — Wed, 13 May 2009 22:54:38 +0000

It was a given that government spending would be slow. All those contracting laws and such. Not to mention, the press to investigate corruption which will cause the procurement and grant officers to dot the i's and cross the t's.

A tax cut on the otherhand would have happened almost instantaneously barring uncertainty caused by repeal rhetoric. Instantaneously because millions of business decisions would be made relying on the the rule of law. Lots of little decisions with risk of corruption dispersed and impacting individuals instead of a few really big decisions with corruption diverting enormous amounts of money from lots of people. On the otherhand, tax cuts are hard to direct the corruption to the politicians favorite supporters.

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Wed, 13 May 2009 22:38:03 +0000

For all I know getting out 6% of the spending in three months after the legislation is an amazingly fast rate by historic standards.

Still not fast enough. Unless you really think the economy will be in recession for 2 more years.

By: Steve Plunk

Steve Plunk — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:51:34 +0000

A tax cut would have been immediate and would have bolstered consumer and business confidence. Heck, if we're borrowing to fund the stimulus why not borrow for tax cuts? The idea is to get money into the economy. Tax cuts just remove the Feds as middle man.

Neither stimulus spending or tax cuts are prudent moves but one is better than the other.

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:49:56 +0000

The Bush stimulus package of 2008 was signed February 13, 2008, and the checks began being mailed at the end of March. It took a few months as I recall.

I'm really curious as to what tax credits the NYTimes is counting as stimulus. Most tax credits aren't realized until you file your tax return next year.

By: spencer

spencer — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:09:46 +0000

Can you provide me data comparing the speed of spending to other examples of fiscal stimulous.

Perhaps the Ford stimulous program in 1974 would make a good example.

For all I know getting out 6% of the spending in three months after the legislation is an amazingly fast rate by historic standards.

By: PD Shaw

PD Shaw — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:06:50 +0000

only $46 billion has been spent so far.

No. According to the Vice President's report only $28.5 billion has been spent, $15.9 billion of which has was medical assistance payments to states. The NY Times apparantly adds the tax credits to that number to reach $45.6 billion. VP Report

By: How Much of the Stimulus Has Been Spent? : The American Pundit

How Much of the Stimulus Has Been Spent? : The American Pundit — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:39:10 +0000

[...] Outside the Beltway, Hot [...]

By: Drew

Drew — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:36:07 +0000

"Nonetheless, to the frustration of some local governments, the federal spigot has been more trickle than flood, and states are facing such fiscal pressure that many are cutting jobs anyway."

The private bank that handles some of my money put out a piece that made this very point. The federal stimulus may be offset by state and local retraction.

Fascinating.