Like going to the moon - perhaps energy independence in 20 years or whatever.
That exactly my point. These are long term things, not counter-cyclical stimulus.
If they are worthwhile, they should be pushed on their own merits, not rushed through in an emergency. The majority of the spending will happen over years, or even decades. The idea with stimulus is months, maybe a year, on the outside two (and that might not be quick enough), not multiple years.
Not that I'm necessarily supporting a quick stimulus either, but essentially no economic theory with any serious degree of support suggest that a spending plan over a decade will be very good stimulus. It would be good if government spending created a stimulus that lifted the long term growth rate, but even Keynes (when he was alive), Krugman, and other fans of big government stimulus in times of contracting demand, would deny that increasing government spending is generally a long term growth path. The whole idea of Kenysian management of economic demand isn't to make the economy grow faster over time, but to make the harsh downturns less harsh (balanced out by making the booms a bit less "boomy")
So the long term major projects, good or bad, are really something that should be considered just about entirely separately from economic stimulus.
Big plans take time to get going. Normal infrastructure building can happen faster, but you can't spend that much money that quickly, certainly not efficiently. There might be some projects that are just about ready to start, but if they are that probably means they had already had funding, and your just substituting federal funding. Projects that aren't already starting anyway, take awhile to start up. So even if just plain old normal road and bridge building is faster than setting up trips to the moon, or a plan for energy independence, it really isn't very quick. Even according to the theories and ideas that support stimulus spending it only makes sense as a stimulus if you figure we will be stuck with a shrinking economy for at least over a year, and probably several years. Of course that's not exactly a rare thought these days. If you believe it, and are a fan of stimulus spending in tough times, then arguably it makes sense, esp. if you don't really care about deficits (but I don't really agree with any of those viewpoints). |
