David Brooks, again, on what he'd like to see.
He's a center leaning conservative who openly supported Obama earlier and now has some ideas on how to improve the house bill.
Paul Krugman's take. Here's a left leaning columnist who wants to see a bigger stimulus. And he just won the Nobel Prize for Economics.
6 comments:
Right now the stimulus package seems like it's a lot of money to use all at once. Maybe it would be better to spread it out slowly and see if it works before spending 800 billion. It needs to be done, but it might make the opponents happier if it weren't such a huge sum of money in one lump.
I fail to see Krugman’s logic in proposing something that has never worked under such conditions. The tax cuts are not the problem, it’s the spending!
-Matthew
According to the experts anyway (whoever those are supposed to be) The stimulus has to be spent all at the same time in order to bolster confidence in investors. If they don't have confidence in the stock market it doesn't matter how much money (of ours) the government dumps in.
I agree with David Brooks, the stimulus plan needs to be accurately measured for how much money is given to help the economy. As Brooks states “poorly provided fiscal stimulus can have worse side effects than the disease that is to be cured.” If the government is not careful with the decisions of the stimulus plan it could back fire and cause even more debt and trouble. I think the stimulus plan should be cleaner but not necessarily bigger, bigger is not always better. I hope Obama makes the right decisions.
i hope that the stimulus packages is a better idea because that would be what i would actually go for. however, there may be a different approach on people.
oh boy. what is happening to america. you dont shock a dying system. thats for a last chance situation.
Post a Comment