Can We Push Some Of The Stimulus To Cover Economic Education?
from the that-would-be-grand dept
While I don't necessarily agree with everything that Steven Pearlstein says in his latest column, I do have to second the request that if we're going to dump so many hundreds of billions into a "stimulus" plan, could we also spend some money on educating our members of Congress on basic economics? Pearlstein's idea is to put another $53.5 million (or $100,000 per elected Congressional Representative or Senator) to allow them to hire an economics "personal trainer." I'd actually like to take that argument further, and see if there might be some way to educate the wider population on economics a bit more -- so that we'd avoid silly self-damaging proposals like adding "buy American" requirements.Separately, I'd like to point to the open letter written to President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, which asks them to publish whatever stimulus bill is finally agreed to for five full days to allow for public comment. This matches up with Obama's earlier promise (which he has unfortunately failed to live up to) to let the public comment on any legislation for five days before passing it. So much of the action on the stimulus bill has been done behind closed doors, involving various horse trading deals that it seems only fair. We saw with the TARP "rescue" package that the more Congress talked, the more pork was included -- and the early results from that all-too-rapid taxpayer cash dump hasn't been good at all. If the new administration is really committed to transparency, it seems only reasonable to let the public read and provide feedback on the stimulus. Related to this, another excellent source to follow is StimulusWatch.org.
This doesn't mean that the gov't should change the stimulus plan based on exactly what the "most" people want (a recipe for a disaster), but let's let some smart ideas start to bubble up by trusting that when more people are allowed to push ideas forward, some good ideas will come out of the mix. Limiting the discussion to just those inside the Beltway has proven to be a huge disaster for quite some time. Let's get more people involved -- recognizing that there will be plenty of terrible ideas -- but as a way to let some good out-of-the-box thinking emerge.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: economics, economy, politicians, stimulus
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The Two True Lessons of Economics
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You missed a critical adjective
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That also goes along with several other issues.
First public knowledge exists as to where the source (London and Adu Dhabi) of the funds came from in the short selling that forced the stock market down back in Nov 2008 but no presentation was ever publically made of whose funds they were. Or the nationality of the owners of the funds.
If one thinks of investment banks as the financial equivalent of a gasoline storage farm then one can see why the source of the shorting is important. A gas storage farm is a necessary means of storage of petroleum for disbursement to the cars and trucks that drive the economy. They are dangerous places, not as dangerous as many industrial process , but dangerous never the less. They can explode for a variety of reasons – lighting (natural phenomena), accidents, and sabotage. If basic maintenance is not performed and gas is allowed to flow freely on the ground around the storage tanks the tanks will not explode BUT it sure makes for a dangerous situation in which an explosion is likely. Making an explosion likely even when unknown to plant workers does not change the fact that there are only three possible sources of ignition, natural, carelessness, and sabotage.
All the discussions, all the reports, publically available have focused on the lack of maintenance and what it will take to rebuild the tank farm after the fire.
What has not been disclosed is what the source of the fire was. Was it some natural act that came about by a combination of forces that produced the spark? Not likely as there is just no financial equivalent to lightning. Was it that some one mucked up and set the events rolling by accident? Highly probable. Just like some idiot may light a cigarette and through it where the tank fir can start. Highly probable. Or was it that a certain set of people with a high degree of financial specialization took the system down on purpose? If so why?
This whole things stinks of a cover up. But, what is being covered up? Incompetence? Stupidity? Or deliberate sabotage?
I do not know about you people but until I can ascertain what the issue is and what the source of the problem is I can not determine what the realm of potential solutions are. Which brings us back to black operations. How do you stage a cover up of something that is to big to be covered up. Simple you expose it, let every body view it and then with a slight of a magician hand reroute people attention else where. This is exactly what a classical magician does in a magic show.
All the begets the question “What the hell is really going on”?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who's doing the teaching?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
1 case where it makes since to have 'buy American' requirements
This is all said tongue in cheek, of course.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You missed a critical adjective
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You missed a critical adjective
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Buy American requirements re some commodities interesting.
Prevailing wages sounds like unions are covering their "six"
Good, no casinos, sports stadiums, zoos, aquarium are authorized.
The above and a few other tidbits are a bit comical.
As for the other provisions, it almost appears as if each federal agency sat down for a game of poker and played Texas Hold-em for appropriations.
What struck me is that this bill seems little more that a significant increase in appropriated funding so that agencies can enlarge current government programs, many, if not most, of which were dubious before this act and will likely be more securely entrenched with this sizeable increase in additional funds.
Candidly, I feel as if the House package largely reads like a federal bureaucracy bump in funding committed to agency discretion. It was difficult to see how this can truly be termed an economic stimulus plan. I did not note very many appropriations calculated to meaningfully enhance business productivity and innovation for the research, design, development and introduction into the market a wealth of consumer products.
If one supported the social programs propounded by the Democratic Party during the recent election, this legislation seems to be a vehicle to have such programs created and funded in one fell swoop without public hearings and public debate.
In sum, I am left with the question just what is in this package that is supposed to actually stimulate the economy? I read each page of both the House and Senate versions, and while there are differences, the legislation seems to be a Christmas wish-list by each and every federal agency.
Of course, I am confident that our dedicated elected representatives will read and assimilate the contents of each and every one of the 700 or so pages (the House version is about 647 pages, while the Senate version is slightly more than 700). Makes me wish each of them were required to declare under penalty of perjury that the have read it, understand all of it, in good faith believe it is in the best interests of the US, and that they do not have any unpaid state, federal or local taxes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
And, why is nobody calling the 'Stimulus' package what it really is? Its blatant payback to those who pushed the current administration in to power. Why would any sane person fund ACORN given their track record of rampant fraud? Payback. Politics is all about payback, both good and bad. Both sides are masters at this. I believe the only way to stop this stupidity is strict term limits. If we get rid of the professional politicians, we might have a fighting chance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 1 case where it makes since to have 'buy American' requirements
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: 1 case where it makes since to have 'buy American' requirements
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: 1 case where it makes since to have 'buy American' requirements
[ link to this | view in thread ]
From ask.com
"Wal-Mart benefits including incentive/bonus plan, health insurance, profit sharing, 401(k), education, store discounts and other Walmart employment benefits. All Wal-Mart associates (full and part time) can become eligible for insurance benefits."
AND, there has to be SOME incentive to move up, improve your education, or strive for a better life. WalMart is a good place to start, a career for some. Its RETAIL. Its not a law firm, an engineering firm, or the automotive industry. Look what the out-of-control benefits have brought in the big three car companies... $1,250 per car just to fund them, employees pay NOTHING, retirees get it free forever.
So, I disagree. WalMart is not the biggest evil we face.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Politicians and Economics
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Who's doing the teaching?
How could we hope for this to be effective when we don't even know the most productive way to spend our money as a government? The article cited in the post almost sounded like the author didn't think that there was *any* government spending that would be worse than leaving the money in the hands of the private sector.
That's the kind of economist that scares me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stimulus and transparency
I also believe he honestly wants bi-partisanship. I think he is willing to compromise in an attempt to get it.
So, how much of the failure to follow the five day rule is a "failure" on the part of Obama, and how much is the GOP refusing to compromise unless he continues the Bush policy of secrecy?
I'd like to know - how much is really due to Obama, and how much is this due to the GOP being obstructionist?
[ link to this | view in thread ]