SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (102483)1/30/2009 12:12:42 PM
From: Steve Lokness  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 542970
 
John:

Okay, I jumped all over your last post for not addressing cost - before seeing this one.

The second is that a good fix may actually reduce the projected debt by generating new tax revenues. Much of the proposed infrastructure work is likely to do so.

Yes, I agree completely here. But tax cuts and favored liberal spending programs for family planning or food stamps or unemploment benefits will NOT. My stance has been clear all along - I agree with the infra structure stuff.

Maybe I am closer to Krugmans thinking than I first thought. Not that I agree, only that I favor a big big infrastucture plan. I thought the 800,000,000,000 was mostly going for infrastructure when it is not.

More importantly I would like to see a vision. Not just big for bigness sake but a vision as to how America benefits. Something along the lines of the CCC in the depression. America is still benefiting today from some of that work of the CCC - a tremendous investment as it turned out. But what does America have to show for food stamps and unemployement and the like. These are not stimulus but safety nets - as such they deserve to work their way through appropriations like any other bill. That is only fair if we are asking the tax payer for this money.

Respectfully;
steve



To: JohnM who wrote (102483)2/1/2009 10:59:33 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 542970
 
create less debt than a Hooverish "just let it run its course."

Coolege, had he been president at the time of the depression, probably would have pushed the idea of letting it runs its course. Hoover in his younger days might have as well. But by the time he was president his ideas had changed considerably, and he supported both verbally and in policy, quite a lot of economic intervention, more than any other president before him, and perhaps more than any since save FDR.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News